DUKE 

UNIVERSITY 


Digitized  by  the  Internet  Archive 
in  2017  with  funding  from 
Duke  University  Libraries 


https://archive.org/details/prohibitionistst01  nati 


THE 


PROHIBITIONISTS’  TEXT-BOOK. 


ooliPBisrtro 


Arguments,  Appeals,  and  Statistics, 

snowiNO 


THE  INIQUITY  OF  THE  LICENSE  SYSTEM. 


A2iD  THB 

RIGHT  AND  DUTY  OF  PROHIBITION. 


4 

NEW  YORK: 

NATIONAL  TEMPERANCE  SOCIETY  AND  PUBLICATION  HOUSE, 

58  READE  STREET.* 

1S81. 


CONTENTS 


NUMBER  C«  IRCBS. 

Prohibition  Does  Prohibit.  J.  N.  Stearns,  ...  49 

Suppression  of  the  Liquor  Traffic.  Rev.  H.  D.  Kitehell,  D.D.,  48 

The  Throne  of  Iniquity.  Rev.  Albert  Barnes,  D.D.,  . . 23 

Pruits  of  the  Liquor  Traffic.  Sumner  Stebbins,  M.D.,  . , 24 


Maine  Law  Vindicated.  Hon.  Woodbury  Davis,  ...  8 

Review  of  Ex-Governor  Andrew  on  License.  Rev.  Wm.  M. 

Thayer 8 


Indictment  of  the  Rum  Traffic.  By  Rev.  W.  W.  Hicks,  . . 4 

The  Fruits  of  License.  Rev.  William  M.  Thayer,  ...  4 

The  Ballot  for  Temperance.  Rev.  James  B.  Dunn,  ...  4 
Natural  and  Reserved  Rights.  Rev.  Joseph  Cummings,  D.D.,  4 

Evils  of  License.  Rev.  Wm.  M.  Thayer, 4 

Rum  and  Taxation  under  License.  Rev.  Wm.  M.  Thayer,  . 4 


"Why  We  Oppose  the  Traffic.  Rev.  A.  Sutherland,  ...  4 

The  Rumseller  a Robber.  Rev.  Luther  Keene,  ...  8 

Accountableness  for  Evils  of  Intemperance.  Rev.  J.  C.  F oster,  8 
The  Evils  of  Beer  Legislation.  Rev.  James  B.  Dunn,  . . 8 

What  it  all  Costs.  Ovid  Miner,  Esq., 4 

Practical  Workings  of  Prohibition.  Hon  Robert  C.  Pitman,  . 8 

National  Legislation.  A.  M.  Powell,  Esq.,  ....  4 

The  Sabbath  and  Beer  Question.  Rev.  Geo.  L.  Tsylor,  . . 4 
Moral  and  Legal  Suasion.  Hon.  Robert  C.  Pitman,  ...  4 

The  Results  of  Prohibition.  A.  M.  Powell,  Esq.,  ...  4 

Law  as  an  Educator.  Rev.  Wm.  M.  Thayer,  ....  4 

The  Relations  of  Drunkenness  to  Crime.  Elisha  Harris,  M D.,  8 


Constitutionality  and  Duty  of  Prohibition.  Rev.  H.  M.  Scudder,  4 
Governor  of  Massachusetts  Against  License.  Hon.  T.  Talbot,  4 
The  Street  of  Hell.  Rev.  R.  T.  Cross,  ....  .4 

Second  Declaration  of  Independence.  Rev.  A.  W.  Corey,  . 4 

Constitutional  Amendment  on  the  Manufacture  and  Sale  of 
Intoxicating  Liquors.  Hon.  H.  W.  Blair,  ....  43 
Prohibition  in  Maine.  Hon.  Nelson  Dingley,  Jr.  ...  4 

Total,  ...  818 


Prohibition  does  Prohibit; 

OR, 

PROHIBITION  NOT  A FAILURE. 


BY  J.  N.  STEARNS. 


HE  evils  of  intemperance  are  so  great,  so 
evident,  and  so  wide-spread,  that  legisla- 
tion has  always  been  invoked  to  regulate 
and,  if  possible,  to  remove  them.  License 
laws  of  a hundred  different  varieties  have  been 
enacted,  but  have  always  and  everj'^where  proved  a 
failure.  The  evils  increase  as  the  traffic  is  made  re- 
spectable by  the  legal  sanction  of  government.  Cen- 
turies of  experimenting  in  laws  which  legalize,  foster, 
protect,  and  defend  the  sale  of  intoxicating  drinks 
have  brought  innumerable  woes  and  crimes,  and  un 
paralleled  taxation  and  misery.  For  this  the  license 
system,  and  not  prohibition,  is  responsible.  That 
something  different  and  more  radical  must  be  done, 
is  apparent  to  all.  The  effort  to  utterly  and  abso- 
lutely prohibit  the  traffic  is  comparatively  a new  one. 
The  State  of  Maine,  the  pioneer  in  this  new  move- 
ment, has  had  her  law  but  twenty-two  years,  a por- 
tion of  which  it  was  but  partially  executed,  and  much 
of  the  time  had  to  fight  its  way  through  the  courts. 
In  fact,  it  is  hardly  yet  in  good  working  order,  im- 
provements and  amendments  being  made  as  loopholes 
and  evasions  are  discovered. 

The  friends  of  license  and  of  the  “ moderate  ” use 


2 


Prohibition  does  Prohibit 


of  liquors  are  free  in  their  denunciation  of  prohibi- 
tion and  loud  in  their  cry  that  it  is  a “ failure.”  Seve- 
ral books  have  recently  been  written  against  prohi- 
bition, declaring  it  “ uniformly  a failure,”  but  in 
support  of  the  declaration  they  utterly  “fail”  to  give 
any  proof  save  a reference  to  Boston,  Providence,  or 
some  such  large  city,  where  their  friends  are  either 
in  office  or  control  the  police  and  city  government, 
and  where  no  honest  effort  is  made  for  its  enforce- 
ment. 

In  searching  for  reliable  testimony  as  to  the  effect 
of  prohibitory  laws,  we  are  limited  to  comparatively 
a small  territory  and  a short  period  of  time.  The 
uniform  and  accumulative  testimony  of  reliable  and 
responsible  witnesses,  wherever  the  law  has  been  en- 
forced, is  that  “ prohibition  does  prohibit.” 

We  pass  over  the  question  of  the  “ right  and  duty  ” 
of  prohibition,  as  that  has  been  clearly,  and  fully  de- 
monstrated by  others. 

Our  work  is  to  gather  proofs  and  present  evidences 
as  to  the  effect  of  the  laws  when  executed ; and — 

1.  We  find  that  prohibitory  laws  will  not  execute 
themselves,  any  more  than  will  laws  against  thieving 
or  murder. 

2.  Officers  of  the  law  in  full  sympathy  with  the 
drink-traffic  will  not  execute  the  law,  any  more  than 
would  thieves  the  law  against  thieving,  or  murderers 
the  law  against  murder. 

3.  There  are  prohibitory  laws  on  the  statute-books 
of  some.  States  which  are  but  partially  executed,  but 
this  does  not  prove  that  “ prohibition  is  a failure. 
It  only  shows  that  the  sworn  officers  of  the  law  fail 
to  do  their  duty. 

One  of  the  strongest  proofs  that  “ prohibition  does 
prohibit  ” is  found  in  the  fact  that  every  liquor-dealer 


Prohibition  does  Prohibit. 


3 


and  sympathizer  with  the  traffic  is  steadily,  bitterly, 
and  persistently  opposed  to  it. 

Another  strong  reason  is  found  in  the  fact  that 
liquor-dealers  and  their  friends  in  legislatures  always 
vote  to  repeal  prohibitory  laws  and  substitute  “ li- 
cense ” in  their  places. 

Strong  corroborative  testimony  is  found  in  the  fact 
that  the  great  majority  of  those  who  use  wines  and 
liquors  as  a beverage,  and  especially  newspaper  edi- 
tors and  writers,  are  opposed  to  that  prohibition 
which  makes  it  illegal  for  them  to  purchase  their 
favorite  beverages.  The  following  positive,  em- 
phatic, and  reliable  testimony  shows  conclusively 
that  prohibition  does  prohibit  wherever  the  law  is 
enforced. 

MAINE. 

Governor  Dingley,  in  his  address  to  the  Legisla- 
ture, January,  1875,  says: 

“ The  Attorney-General  embodies  in  his  report  communica- 
tions from  the  several  county  attorneys,  furnishing  important  offi- 
cial statements  and  statistics  relating  to  the  enforcement  of  the 
laws  prohibiting  drinking-houses  and  tippling-shops.  The 
statistics  show  that  during  the  past  year,  in  the  Supreme  Court 
alone,  there  have  been  276  convictions,  41  commitments  to 
jail,  and  $30,898  collected  in  fines  under  these  laws — more  of 
each  than  in  any  other  year,  and  four  times  as  many  convic- 
tions and  ten  times  as  much  in  fines  as  in  1866,  when  the 
general  enforcement  of  these  laws  was  resumed  after  the  close 
of  the  war,  which  had  engrossed  the  public  attention  and  ener- 
gies, . It  is  significant,  also,  that  during  these  nine  or  ten  years 
of  gradually  increasing  efficiency  in  tlie  enforcement  of  the  laws 
against  dram-shops,  the  number  of  convicts  in  the  State  Prison 
has  fallen  off  more  than  one-fourth. 

“ The  report  of  the  Attorney-General  and  the  statistics  ac- 
companying conclusively  show  that  the  laws  prohibiting  drink- 


4 


Prohibition  does  Prohibit. 


ing-houses  and  tippling-shops  have  for  the  most  part  been 
enforced  during  the  past  year  more  generally  and  effectively 
than  ever  before,  and  with  corresponding  satisfactory  results  in 
the  diminution  of  dram-shops  and  intemperance.  These  results 
are  due,  to  a considerable  extent,  to  the  increased  efficiency 
given  to  these  laws  by  the  sheriff-enforcement  act,  but  more 
especially  to  the  improved  temperance  sentiment  which  has 
been  created  by  the  moral  efforts  put  forth  in  this  State  within 
a few  years.  It  is  gratifying  to  know  that  this  sentiment  has 
become  so  predominant  as  to  secure  the  very  general  suppres- 
sion of  known  dram-shops,  and  the  consequent  marked  mitiga- 
tion of  the  evils  of  intemperance  in  four-fifths  of  the  State.” 

The  Attorney-General’s  Report  for  1874  contains, 
from  the  county  prosecuting  attorneys  of  Maine, 
reports  as  follows : 

“ Aroostook  County. — There  is  less  drunkenness  and  unlawful 
sale  than  a year  ago. 

“ Cumberland. — (Portland  is  in  this  county.)  I have  met 
with  no  difficulty  in  prosecuting  persons  indicted  for  violations 
of  the  liquor  law  which  does  not  attend  the  successful  prose- 
cution of  other  criminal  offences. 

“ Hancock. — There  is  hardly  a town  where  public  sentiment 
gives  it  any  countenance ; in  no  place  is  liquor  sold  openly. 

“ Knox. — In  farming  towns  there  are  practically  no  viola- 
tions of  the  law. 

Lincoln. — Several  attempts  have  been  made  to  open  rum- 
shops,  but  they  have  in  every  instance  been  ‘ nipped  in  the 
bud.’ 

^'■Penobscot. — Efforts  put  forth  during  the  year  past  have 
been  crowned  with  a fair  degree  of  success. 

^'Androscoggin. — (Lewiston,  with  a population  of  15,000,  is 
in  this  county.)  Ever  since  the  enactment  of  the  liquor  law, 
the  faithful  manner  in  which  the  same  has  been  executed  has 
rendered  the  county  of  Androscoggin  not  only  an  expensive 
field  for  the  rumseller  to  ply  his  trade  in,  but  a dangerous  one, 
so  far  as  his  personal  liberty  is  concerned.  There  is  not  as 


Prohibition  does  Prohibit. 


5 


open  bar  for  the  sale  of  intoxicating  liquors  in  operation.  It 
is  not,  as  has  been  declared,  an  impossibility  effectually  to  sup- 
press drinking-houses  and  tippling-shops.  The  newspapers  in 
this  county  advocate  in  the  strongest  terms  the  importance  of 
enforcing  the  liquor  law. 

Kennebec. — One-third  more  successful  prosecutions  than 
during  any  similar  period  since  1866. 

“ Piscataquis. — I find  no  special  difficulty  in  enforcing  the 

law. 

“ Sagadahoc. — ^The  law  has  been  successfully  adnii"istered 
in  the  county. 

“ York. — During  the  present  year,  signalized  as  it  1 is  been 
by  prolonged  effort  to  suppress  the  traffic  by  force  of  law, 
crowned  as  this  effort  has  been  by  success  much  exceeding  our 
most  sanguine  expectations,  the  people  of  this  county  have 
marked  the  contrast  between  free  rum  and  total  prohibition. 
The  absence  of  petty  crime,  the  peace  and  good  order  m the 
community,  are  most  marked.  In  the  city  of  Biddeford,  a 
manufacturing  place  of  11,000  inhabitants,  for  a month  at  a 
time  not  a single  arrest  for  drunkenness  or  disturbance  has 
been  made  or  become  necessary.  In  the  city  of  Saco,  it  is 
doubtful  if  a single  place  can  be  found  where  intoxicating 
liquor  is  sold.” 

Governor  Dingley,  in  his  address  to  the  Legisla 
ture  in  1874,  said  : 

“ This  system  has  had  a trial  of  only  twenty-two  years ; yet 
its  success  in  this  brief  period  has,  on  the  whole,  been  so  much 
greater  than  that  of  any  other  , plan  yet  devised,  that  prohibi- 
tion may  be  said  to  be  accepted  by  a large  majority  of  the 
people  of  this  State  as  the  proper  policy  towards  drinking- 
houses  and  tippling-shops. 

“ Where  our  prohibitory  laws  have  been  well  enforced,  few 
will  deny  that  they  have  accomplished  great  good.  In  more 
than  three-fourths  of  the  State,  especially  in  the  rural  portions, 
public  sentiment  has  secured  such  an  enforcement  of  these 
laws  that  there  are  now  in  these  districts  few  open  bars ; and 


6 


Prohibition  does  Prohibit. 


even  secret  sales  are  so  much  reduced  that  drunkenness  in  the 
rural  towns  is  comparatively  rare.” 

Governor  Chamberlain,  in  his  messag^e  to  the  Legis- 
lature in  1870,  said  : 

“ The  laws  against  intoxicating  liquors  are  as  well  executed 
and  obeyed  as  the  laws  against  profanity,  unchastity,  and 
murder.” 

Governor  Sidney  Perham,  in  his  message  to  the 
Legislature  in  1872,  said  : 

“ The  present  law,  when  it  is  enforced,  is,  so  far  as  I can 
judge,  as  effective  in  the  suppression  of  the  traffic  as  are  Other 
criminal  laws  against  the  crimes  they  are  intended  to  prevent.” 

Again,  in  1873,  Governor  Perham  said  : 

“ It  is  probable  that  less  intoxicating  liquors  are  drunk  in 
Maine  than  in  any  other  place  of  equal  population  in  the 
country — perhaps  in  the  civilized  world.  Other  States  have 
temperance  men  and  women  as  devoted  and  as  efficient  as 
ours,  but,  having  no  laws  to  aid  them,  the  success  they  deserve 
is  not  attained.” 

Governor  Nelson  Dingley,  Jr.,  said,  in  1874,  to  the 
Commissioners  of  the  Canadian  Parliament; 

“ All  organized  opposition  to  the  law  has  died  out.  The 
great  majority,  probably  two-thirds  of  the  people  at  least, 
heartily  approve  of  it  as  the  best  system  of  restriction  of  the 
liquor-traffic  yet  devised,  and  the  most  of  the  minority  acquiesce 
in  it  as  a policy  which  deserves  a thorough  trial. 

“ The  great  improvement  in  the  drinking  habits  of  the 
people  of  this  State  within  thirty  or  forty  years  is  so  evident 
that  no  candid  man  who  has  observed  or  investigated  the  facts 
can  deny  it. 

“ The  city  of  Lewiston  (with  Auburn),  with  a population  of 
about  30,000,  has  not  an  open  dram-shop.  Secret  drinking  has 
not  taken  the  place  of  open  drinking.” 

Mon.  Wra.  P.  Frye,  member  of  Congress  and  ex- 


Prohibition  does  Prohibit. 


7 

Attorney-General  of  Maine,  writing^  to  Hon.  Neal 
Dow,  says  ; 

“ I can  and  do,  from  my  own  personal  observation,  unhesi- 
tatingly affirm  that  the  consumption  cf  intoxicating  liquors  in 
Maine  is  not  to-day  one-fourth  as  great  as  it  was  twenty  years 
ago ; that,  in  the  country  portions  of  the  State,  the  sale  and 
use  have  almost  entirely  ceased ; that  the  law  of  itself,  under 
a vigorous  enforcement  of  its  provisions,  has  created  a tem- 
perance sentiment  which  is  marvellous,  and  to  which  opposi- 
tion is  powerless.  In  my  opinion,  our  remarkable  temperance 
reform  of  to-day  is  the  legitimate  child  of  the  law.” 

The  above  was  concurred  in  by  United  States 
Senators  Hon.  Lot  M.  Morrill  and  Hon.  Hannibal 
Hamlin  ; also  by  members  of  Congress  J.  G.  Blaine, 
John  Lynch,  John  A.  Peters,  and  Eugene  Hale. 

In  another  letter,  addressed  to  Geo.  Shepard 
Page,  Esq.,  dated  Washington,  Dec.  22,  1871,  Mr. 
Frye  writes : 

“ The  ‘ Maine  Law  ’ has  not  been  a failure  in  that,  ist.  It 
has  made  rumselling  a crime,  so  that  only  the  lowest  and 
most  debased  will  now  engage  in  it.  2d,  The  rum-buyer  is  a 
participator  in  a crime,  and  the  large  majority  of  moderate 
respectable  drinkers  have  become  abstainers.  3d,  It  has 
gradually  created  a public  sentiment  against  both  selling  and 
drinking.  4th,  In  all  of  the  country  portions  of  the  State, 
where,  twenty  years  ago,  there  was  a grocery  or  tavern  at 
every- four  corners,  and  within  a circuit  of  two  miles  unpainted 
houses,  broken  windows,  neglected  farms,  poor  school-houses, 
broken  hearts  and  homes,  it  has  banished  almost  every  such 
grocery  and  tavern,  and  introduced  peace,  plenty,  happiness, 
and  prosperity.  These  two  things,  making  the  rum-traffic  dis- 
graceful both  to  seller  and  buyer,  the  renovating  and  reforming 
of  all  the  country  portion  of  the  State,  are  the  worthy  and  well- 
earned  trophies  of  our  Maine  Li(juor  Law,  and  commend  it  to 
the  prayers  and  good  wishes  of  all  good  citizens.  ...  Of 
this  law  I have  been  prosecuting  attorney  for  ten  years,  and 


8 


Prohibition  does  Prohibit. 


cheerfully  bear  witness  to  its  efficiency  whenever  and  wherevei 
faithfully  administered.  It  has  done  more  good  than  any  law 
on  our  statute-book,  and  is  still  at  work.  With  its  provisions 
you  can  effectually  close  every  liquor-shop  outside  your  cities, 
and  in  them  make  the  selling  of  ardent  spirits  a very  dangerous 
and  risky  business.  There  cannot  be  found  a man  in  Maine, 
who  is  not  prejudiced  by  reason  of  being  a seller,  or  drinker  to 
excess,  or  by  party  passion,  who  will  not  concur  with  me  in 
saying  that  its  blessings  have  been  incalculable,  nor  a respect- 
able woman  who  does  not  pray  for  its  continuance.  Thus 
briefly  I have  given  my  testimony,  and  I know  whereof  I 
affirm." 

Hon.  Woodbury  Davis,  Judge  of  the  Supreme 
Court  for  ten  years,  said  : 

“ The  Maine  Law  even  now  is  enforced  far  more  than  the 
license  laws  ever  were.  In  proportion  to  the  number  of  people 
participating  in  the  evil  to  be  suppressed,  it  is  enforced  in  the 
State  as  well  as  are  the  laws  to  prevent  licentiousness.” 

Horace  Greeley  visited  the  State  of  Maine  in 
1855,  and  in  the  New  York  Tribujte  gave  the  fol- 
lowing testimony : 

“ The  pretence  that  as  much  liquor  is  sold  now  in  Maine  as 
in  former  years  is  impudently  false.  We  spent  three  dSys  in 
travelling  through  the  State  without  seeing  a glass  of  it,  or  an 
individual  who  appeared  to  be  under  its  influence,  and  we  were 
reliably  assured  that,  at  the  Augusta  House,  where  the  Gov- 
ernor and  most  of  the  Legislature  board,  not  only  was  no 
liquor  to  be  harl,  but  even  the  use  of  tobacco  had  almost 
entirely  ceased.” 

All  of  the  prominent  pastors  in  Portland  signed 
the  following  statement: 

“ Portland,  May  31,  1872. 

“ As  to  the  effect  of  the  Maine  Law  upon  the  traffic  in  strong 
drinks,  we  say,  without  hesitation,  that  the  trade  in  intoxicating 
liquors  has  been  greatly  reduced  by  it. 


Prohibition  does  Prohibit. 


9 


“ In  this  city,  the  quantity  sold  now  is  tiut  a small  fraction  of 
what  we  remember  the  sales  to  have  been ; and  we  believe  the 
results  are  the  same,  or  nearly  so,  throughout  the  State.  If  the 
trade  exists  at  all  here,  it  is  carried  on  with  secresy  and  caution, 
as  other  unlawful  practices  are.  All  our  people  must  agree 
that  the  benefits  of  this  state  of  things  are  obvious  and  very 
great.” 

Benj.  Kingsbury,  Jr.,  Mayor  of  Portland,  and  four 
ex-mayors,  united  in  saying  that, 

“ As  to  the  diminution  of  the  liquor-traffic  in  the  State  of 
Maine,  and  particularly  in  this  city,  as  the  result  of  the  adop- 
tion of  the  policy  of  prohibition,  we  have  to  say  that  the  traffic 
has  fallen  off  very  largely.  In  relation  to  that  there  cannot 
possibly  be  any  doubt.” 

J.  S.  Wheel wrig’ht,  Mayor  of  Bang'or,  says: 

“ It  is  safe  to  say  that  in  our  city  not  one-tenth  part  as  much 
is  sold  now  as  in  years  past.” 

A Convention  of  Pastors  of  Free  Baptist  Churches 
in  Maine,  in  1872,  declared 

“ That  the  liquor-traffic  is  very  greatly  diminished  under  the 
repressive  power  of  the  Maine  Law.  It  cannot  be  one  tithe 
of  what  it  was  formerly.” 

Judge  Clifford,  Associate  Justice  of  the  Supreme 
Court,  said  : 

“ Under  the  operation  of  the  law  there  has  been  a diminu- 
tion of  crime,  and  the  effort  had  been  to  make  the  sale  of  liquor 
disreputable,  and  to  confine  the  traffic  to  the  lowest  class  of 
persons.” 

J.  H.  Drummond,  formerly  Attorney-General,  said  : 

“ There  were  no  more  violations  in  proportion  to  the  drink- 
ers, than  there  were  violations  of  the  law  against  theft  in  pro- 
portion to  thieves.” 

W.  W.  Rice,  Warden  of  the  State  Prison,  Thomas- 
ton,  said 


lO 


Prohibition  does  Prohibit. 


“That  seven-eighths  of  the  prisoners  were  there  through 
liquor.  The  drinking  customs  are  gradually  diminishing. 
There  are  no  places  of  open  sale  in  thi-s  town.  The  eflfect  of 
the  law  has  been  to  make  the  traffic  infamous,” 

Hon.  George  G.  Stacy,  Secretary  of  State,  Au- 
gusta, said : 

“ I have  known  the  city  of  Augusta  fifteen  years ; there 
were  then  open  bars,  but  now  not  one,  and  the  law  has  been  a 
success,  though  of  course  selling  is  not  entirely  suppressed. 
The  effect  of  the  law  has  been  to  largely  reduce  crime,  espe- 
cially that  class  of  crime  such  as  gambling,  fighting,  etc.” 

General  Dyer,  Inspector-General  of  the  Militia, 
Bangor,  said  : 

“That  in  his  county  (Kennebec),  with  a population  of  about 
thirty-nine  thousand,  containing  three  cities  and  twenty-four 
towns,  the  law  was  enforced ; that  it  was  the  best  law  they 
ever  had;  and  that  it  materially  improved  both  the  moral  and 
social  condition  of  the  people,  as  it  reduced  crime  and 
poverty.  ” 

Joseph  Farrell,  United  States  Justice,  Rockland, 
said  : 

“ He  had  resided  here  for  forty-five  years ; was  mayor 
of  the  city  from  March,  1867,  to  March,  1869  ; remembers 
the  period  prior  to  the  passing  of  the  Maine  Law ; at  that 
time  licenses  were  granted  for  one  dollar;  in  this  town  then 
there  were  fourteen  stores,  and  liquor  was  sold  in  all  but  two ; 
the  drinking  customs  were  universal — at  every  gathering,  such 
as  raisings,  town-militia  musters,  huskings,  and  Fourth-of-July 
celebrations,  fights  were  of  frequent  occurrence ; but  now 
there  is  no  open  sale  in  the  city.  Is  of  opinion  that  the  law 
being  on  the  statute-book,  even  if  not  enforced,  has  a good 
moral  influence,  as  it  familiarizes  the  people  with  the  fact  that 
rum  is  outside  of  law.” 

Hon.  S.  L.  Carleton,  of  Portland,  said  : 

“ The  sale  of  liquor  has  been  banished  to  the  lowest  street! 


Prohibition  does  Prohibit. 


II 


of  the  city.  The  law,  in  prohibiting  the  sale  of  liquor,  has 
taken  from  it  its  only  claim  to  respectability,  and  had  outlawed 
it.” 

H.  Clay  Goodman,  Judge  of  Police  Court,  Bangor, 
said  : 

In  some  years  the  law  was  better  enforced  than  others,  and 
during  the  year  in  which  it  had  been  most  stringently  enforced, 
crime  had  decidedly  diminished.” 

Nathan  Frost,  one  of  the  Selectmen  of  Orono,  said  : 

“ The  enforcement  of  the  law  has  had  a great  effect  upon 
Ihe  social  and  moral  condition  of  the  people,  and  has  very  ma> 
terially  reduced  poverty  within  the  last  five  years  since  the  law 
was  better  enforced.” 

The  Hon  Wolcott  Hamlin,  Supervisor  of  Internal 
Revenue  for  Maine,  in  1872,  says: 

“ In  the  course  of  my  duty  as  an  internal  revenue  officer,  I 
have  become  thoroughly  acquainted  with  the  state  and  extent 
of  the  liquor  traffic  in  Maine,  and  I have  no  hesitation  in  say- 
ing that  the  beer  trade  is  not  more  than  one  per  cent,  of  what 
I remember  it  to  have  been,  and  the  trade  in  distilled  liquors 
is  not  more  than  ten  per  cent,  of  what  it  formerly  was.  Where 
liquor  is  sold  at  all,  it  is  done  secretly,  through  fear  of  the  law.” 

Hon.  Joshua  Nye,  late  State  Constable,  and  who  is 
as  well  qualified  to  speak  for  the  State  as  any  living 
man,  in  a letter  dated  May  18,  1875,  gives  the  fol- 
lowing : 

“ Within  the  past  six  months  I have  visited  thirteen  of  the 
sixteen  counties  of  Maine,  and  I know  whereof  I speak  when 
I say  that  the  cause  of  temperance  never  stood  so  well  before. 
The  law  is  well- enforced,  and  in  nearly  all  the  towns  no  intoxi- 
cating liquor  is  sold  contrary  to  law. 

“ The  temperance  people  are  awake,  and  intend  to  prove  t< 
the  world  that  Maine  will  take  no  step  backward  in  the  tem 
perance  work.” 


12 


Prohibition  does  Prohibit. 


Hon.  Neal  Dow,  in  a speech  delivered  in  Associ- 
ation Hall  in  July,  1875,  on  the  occasion  of  a recep- 
tion tendered  him  by  the  National  Temperance 
Society  on  his  return  from  England,  said ; 

“They  say  the  Maine  Law  has  failed  even  in  Maine.  Now 
Mr.  President,  ladies  and  gentlemen,  there  is  not  a word  of 
truth  in  that ; it  is  all  false  from  beginning  to  end.  The 
Maine  Law  has  not  failed,  directly  or  indirectly.  Is  there  not 
any  liquor  sold  in  Maine  or  in  any  ^of  the  other  Maine-Law 
States  ? Yes,  there  is;  but  you  do  not  infer,  therefore,  that  it 
is  a failure.  If  you  can  show  that  there  is  as  much  liquor  sold 
in  proportion  to  the  population  with  the  same  effect  as  there 
was  before  the  Maine  Law,  that  would  show  the  law  to  be  a 
failure.  But  in  the  State  of  Maine  there  is  not  one-tenth  part 
as  much  of  the  liquor  sold  as  there  was  before  the  Maine  Law. 
The  whole  character  of  the  population  is  changed  as  the  result 
of  that  law.  There  is  liquor  sold  in  Maine,  but  only  secretly. 
I live  in  the  largest  town  in  Maine,  and  you  see  no  sign  of 
liquor-selling  anywhere  at  all.  If  one  went  into  a hotel  and 
asked  for  a glass  of  liquor,  I do  not  know  but  that  a person 
who  knew  the  ropes  might  get  it.  They  declare,  however, 
that  they  honestly  keep  the  law,  and  apparently  they  do. 
Wherever  liquor  is  suspected  of  being  kept  with  intent  to  sell 
in  violation  of  law,  the  officers  search  for  it  and  seize  it. 
Every  two  or  three  days  we  have  some  seizure,  but  usually  in 
very  small  quantities — a quart,  a gallon,  and  sometimes  only 
a bottle  from  the  pocket  of  a man  who  intends  to  sell  that  way. 

“ I remember  the  time  when  there  were  seven  distilleries  in 
Portland,  running  night  and  day,  at  the  same  time  vast  quan- 
tities of  liquor  were  imported,  especially  in  the  ship  Margaret^ 
one  of  the  most  famous  ships  in  New  England,  whose  cargo 
of  St.  Croix  rum  was  spread  out  upon  the  wharves.  How  is 
it  now  ? We  have  not  a distillery  running  in  all  the  State  of 
Maine,  nor  is  there  a puncheon  of  rum  imported.  I should  be 
warranted  in  saying  that  there  is  not  one-fiftieth  part  of  the 
quantity  of  liquor  sold  now  as  was  sold  previous  to  the  passagf 


Prohibition  does  Prohibit. 


n 


of  the  prohibitory  law,  but  I will  say  one-tenth.  Senators  and 
representatives  in  Congress,  judges  of  courts,  ministers  and 
merchants,  have  signed  certificates  which  were  sent  to  Eng- 
land, in  which  they  say  the  quantity  of  liquor  sold  is  not  one- 
tenth  so  great  as  was  sold  before.” 

Hon.  Woodbury  Davis,  Judge  of  the  Supreme 
Court  of  the  State  of  Maine,  in  referring  to  the  cry 
that  the  Maine  Law  is  a failure,  says : 

“ So  its  opponents  have  often  alleged.  ‘ The  wish  is  father 
to  the  thought.’  So  its  friends  sometimes  have  almost  con- 
ceded. They  have  been  too  easily  discouraged.  They  have 
hoped  for  results  too  large,  and  too  soon ; and  they  have  been 
disappointed.  The  law  has  not  been  a failure.  It  has  already 
accomplished  great  results,  though  it  has  but  just  passed  the 
ordeal  of  political  agitation  and  judicial  construction,  in  its 
struggle  for  permanent  life.  Every  new  system,  though  it  may 
ride  prosperously  in  its  first  success,  is  subject  to  the  law  of  re- 
action. It  must  enter  the  lists,  and  conquer  the  place  it  would 
hold.  The  Maine  Law  has  been  no  exception.  Even  in  Maine, 
as  we  shall  see,  its  friends  have  be-en,  and  still  are,  compelled 
to  spend  much  of  their  strength  in  wringing  from  its  enemies 
amendments  needed  for  its  success,  instead  of  giving  their  time 
for  its  enforcement.  Much  has  been  done  in  this  respect  since 
the  law  was  originally  enacted ; but  some  things  remain  yet  to 
be  done.  The  period  of  growth  is  not  the  time  for  fruit,  espe- 
pecially  when  the  whole  country  has  been  swept  by  the  storm 
of  civil  strife.  That  as  much  has  been  accomplished  as  ought 
to  have  been  expected,  an  examination  of  the  circumstances 
will  show,” 


MAINE  AND  NEW  JERSEY. 

The  following  from  the  United  States  Census  of 
1870,  under  the  head  of  “Occupations,”  contrasts 
prohibition  and  “stringent  license,”  the  lesson  of 
which  is  obvious : 


‘4 


Prohibition  does  Prohibit. 


Maine.  New  Jeney. 


Barkeepers 72  338 

*Restaurant-keepers 280 

f Liquors  and  wines 36  665 

Brewers  and  maltsters 25  573 

Distillers  and  rectifiers 8 43 


MASSACHUSETTS. 

Hon.  Thomas  Talbot,  in  his  message  vetoing  the 
Liquor  License  Bill  in  January,  1874,  said  : 

“ The  history  of  the  struggle  with  the  evils  of  intemperance 
is  most  instructive.  The  earliest  attempts  to  check  the  use  of 
intoxicating  liquors  were  in  the  direction  of  license  and  regu- 
lation. These  attempts  continued  in  the  Commonwealth  for 
more  than  two  hundred  years,  with  a constantly  increasing 
stringency,  which  can  only  be  explained  on  the  ground  that 
mild  measures  were  found  to  be  insufficient,  until,  in  1855,  tho 
experiment  was  determined  upon  of  adopting  prohibition,  as  the 
only  logical  and  effective  method  of  dealing  with  the  matter 
Without  asserting  that  this  has  proved  so  successful  in  over 
coming  the  evils  it  was  meant  to  remedy  as  was  hoped  by 
those  who  initiated  and  those  who  sustain  the  prohibitory 
policy,  I am  fully  of  the  opinion  that  more  progress  has  been 
made  toward  the  desired  end  than  was  ever  before  made  in  the 
same  period  under  any  other  system.  In  considering  what  has 
been  accomplished,  we  must  recognize  the  great  changes  that 
have  taken  place  since  this  system  was  inaugurated. 

“ I am  aware  that  it  is  said  intemperance  increases  under 
our  prohibitory  law — that  the  sale  of  intoxicants  is  as  great  as 
it  would  be  under  a license  law.  But  I call  your  attention  to 
the  absence  hereof  the  flaunting  and  attractive  bar-iooms,  that 
spread  their  snares  to  capture  the  thoughtless  and  easily- 
tempted  in  cities  where  licenses  prevail;  to  the  constantly 
growing  sense  of  disfavor  with  which  the  liquor  traffic  is  re- 

* In  Maine,  the  keepers  of  restaurants  do  not  sell  liquors.  In  New 
lersey,  with  hardly  an  exception,  liquors  are  sold  in  these  placet. 

t This  refers  to  the  number  of  State  liquor-agents  in  Maine. 


Prohibition  does  Prohibit. 


15 


garded  by  the  country  generally ; and  to  the  powerful,  syste- 
matic, and  unrelenting  activity  of  those  interested  in  it  to  break 
down  the  law  and  the  officers  who  try  to  enforce  it.  Here  is  an 
evidence  that  the  statute  does  impose  an  active  and  crippling 
restraint,  from  which  relief  is  sought  in  the  elastic  and.  easily- 
evolved  providence  of  license.” 

Governor  Washburn,  in  his  Annual  Message  to  the 
Legislature  in  1874,  said: 

“ Some  honest  reformers  may  urge  the  fact  that  the  present 
law  is  not  thoroughly  enforced  in  our  large  cities  as  a reason 
for  its  repeal  and  the  substitution  of  a license  law  in  its  stead. 
But  shall  we  repeal  the  laws  against  gambling,  prostitution, 
pocket-picking,  and  burglary  simply  because  they  cannot  be 
thoroughly  enforced  in  densely  populated  localities  ? This 
would  be  equivalent  to  saying  that  we  will  not  have  any  laws 
that  are  unpalatable  to  the  worst  classes  in  our  cities.  It 
would  be  sacrificing  the  State  to  the  city;  it  would  be  levelling 
downward  rather  than  upward.  Furthermore,  the  idea  that  a 
license  law  would  be  efficiently  administered  through  local 
agencies  is  a delusion  and  a snare.  The  experiment  has  been 
tried  again  and  again.  But  did  the  authorities  of  these  same 
large  cities  ever  show  any  greater  anxiety  to  enforce  a license 
law  than  they  now  do  to  enforce  the  existing  prohibitory  sta- 
tute ? The  friends  of  this  statute  may  safely  challenge  its  op- 
nents  to  the  record.” 

Hen.  R.  C.  Pitman,  Judge  of  the  Supreme  Court, 
in  an  eight-page  tract  showing  the  practical  work- 
ings of  prohibition  in  New  Bedford,  presents  statis- 
tics from  official  reports,  showing  a decrease  of  37 
per  cent,  in  cases  of  drunkenness  under  prohibition, 
and  an  increase  of  68  per  cent,  in  the  number  of 
crimes,  and  140  per  cent,  in  cases  of  drunkenness, 
when  license  prevailed.  He  says  : 

First.  It  has  been  fully  demonstrated  that,  the  prohibitory 


i6  Prohibition  does  Prohibit. 

law  can  be  enforced  to  the  same  extent  as  other  criminal 
laws. 

“ Second.  That  such  enforcement  would  be  productive  of 
the  diminution  of  crime  in  general  and  the  promotion  of 
peace  and  good  order  in  our  communities.” 

Captain  Boynton,  Chief  of  State  Police  in  1874, 
said  : 

“ The  law  is  only  partially  enforced,  but  in  one-half  the 
towns  it  has  entirely  suppressed  the  sale.  There  are  five  hun 
dred  less  places  in  Boston  for  the  sale  of  liquor  than  there 
were  two  years  ago.” 

W.  J.  May,  District- Attorney  for  Suffolk  County 
in  1874,  said  : 

“ The  law  is  enforced  generally  throughout  the  State  in  the 
country  towns,  and  with  good  effect.  The  shutting  up  of  the 
open  bar  is  certainly  productive  of  a great  reduction  in  drink- 
ing.” 

The  Statistical  Report  of  the  State  Police  for  1873 
shows  8,136  liquor  prosecutions;  4,265  prosecutions 
for  general  offences  ; 5,545  liquor  seizures  ; 105  gam- 
bling; total,  18,051.  The  receipts  from  all  sources, 
$301,989  42  ; expenses  of  the  department,  $150,093  71 ; 
balance  in  favor  of  Constabulary,  $151,895  71. 

Judge  Sanger,  District- Attorney  of  Suffolk,  testi- 
fied before  the  Legislative  Committee  that  the  law 
“can  in  time  be  executed,  and  is  executed.”  In 
reply  to  a question  as  to  what  effect  it  had  upon 
the  sale  of  liquor  in  Boston,  he  said  : 

“ It  has  a tendency  to  diminish  it,  and  it  has  in  fact  dimin- 
ished it.” 

George  Marston,  District-Attorney  for  the  South- 
ern District  in  1S74.  said  : 

“ There  can  be  no  doubt  that  tlie  enforcement  of  the  law 
decreases  crime.  No  other  logical  result  can  be  reached.  As 


Prohibition  does  Pfohibit. 


Intoxication  is  the  cause  of  a large  majority  of  tlie  crimes  that 
are  committed,  it  follows,  of  course,  when  the  sale  of  intoxicat- 
ing liquor  can  be  suppressed  or  repressed,  crime  will  decrease 
Experience  shows  that  practical  result ; when  the  law  is  most 
fully  enforced,  crime  has  decreased.” 

John  B.  Goodrich,  District-Attorney  for  Middle- 
sex County,  said  : 

“ Generally,  the  strict  enforcement  of  the  law  largely  reduces 
the  business  of  the  courts.” 

Major  Jones,  formerly  Chief  of  State  Police,  said  ; 

“ The  law  is  as  well  enforced  generally  through  the  State  as 
any  other  law ; but  in  Boston  the  liquor  sellers  and  dealers 
spend  money  freely,  and  are  well  organized.  There  are  about 
three  hundred  and  sixty  towns,  and  in  three  hundred  of  them 
the  law  is  well  enforced,  and  it  exercises  an  influence  upon  the 
others.” 

General  B.  F.  Butler  said  : 

“ This  law  was  enforced  in  all  the  cities  and  towns,  with  the 
exception  of  a few  of  the  larger  cities,  as  much  and  as  generally 
as  the  laws  against  larceny.”  . 

The  City  Marshal  of  Worcester  testifies  that 
drunkenness  decreased  40  per  cent,  in  that  city  in 
one  year  under  the  prohibitory  law. 

Oliver  Ames  & Sons,  I^orth  Easton,  say  : 

“We  have  over  four  hundred  men  in  our  works  here. 

“ We  find  that  the  present  license  law  has  a very  bad  effect 
among  our  employees. 

‘■We  find  on  comparing  our  production  in  May  and  June 
of  this  year  (1868)  with  that  of  the  corresponding  months  of 
last  year  (1867),  that  in  1867,  with  375  men,  we  produced  (8) 
eight  per  cent,  more  goods  than  we  did  in  the  same  months  in 
1868  with  400  men.  We  attribute  this  falling-ofl  entirely  to 
the  repeal  of  the  prohibitory  law,  and  the  great  increase  in  tho 
Use  of  intoxicating  liquors  among  our  men  in  consequence.” 


1 8 Prohibition  does  Prohibit, 

At  the  great  Boston  fire,  all  the  liquor-shops  were 
closed  by  the  authorities,  and  kept  closed,  so  that  the 
rabble  might  not  get  tipsy,  and  robbery,  drunken- 
ness, and  the  like  might  not  prevail.  It  was  the  uni- 
versal testimony  of  citizens  and  the  press  that  this 
“ prohibition  ” did  effectually  “ prohibit,’’  and  Boston 
for  once  was  sober  and  quiet.  This  was  “ made  rea- 
sonable by  the  extraordinary  occasion,”  says  a promi- 
nent disbeliever  in  the  “ morality  of  prohibitory 
laws,”  but  it  is  strong  and  emphatic  testimony  to 
the  power  and  efficiency  of  the  principle  of  prohibi- 
tion. 

Massachusetts  repealed  her  prohibitory  law  in 
November,  1867,  and  substituted  license.  Governor 
Claflin,  in  his  Message  to  the  Legislature,  January, 
1869,  said  : 

“ The  increase  of  drunkenness  and  crime  during  the  last  six 
months,  as  compared  with  the  same  period  of  1867,  is  very 
marked  and  decisive  as  to  the  operation  of  the  law.  The 
State  prisons,  jails,  and  houses  of  correction  are  being  rapidly 
filled,  and  will  sooh  require  enlarged  accommodation  if  the 
commitments  continue  to  increase  as  they  have  since  the 
present  law  went  into  force.” 

The  Chaplain  of  the  State  Prison,  in  his  Annual 
Report  for  1868,  says: 

“ The  prison  never  has  been  so  full  as  at  the  present  time. 
If  the  rapidly  increasing  tide  of  intemperance,  so  greatly  swollen 
by  the  present  wretched  license  law,  is  suffered  to  rush  on  un- 
checked, there  will  be  a fearful  increase  of  crime,  and  the  State 
must  soon  extend  the  limits  of  the  prison,  or  erect  another.” 

The  Chief  Constable  of  the  Commonwealth,  in  his 
Annual  Report  for  1869,  said; 

“ This  law  has  opened  and  legalized  in  the  various  cities  and 
towns  about  two  thousand  five  hundred  open  bars,  and  over 


Prohibition  does  Prohibit. 


19 


one  thousand  other  places  where  liquors  are  presumed  not  to 
be  sold  by  the  glass.” 

The  Prohibitory  Law  was  again  enacted,  and  in 
force  for  several  years. 

It  was  enforced  so  effectually,  and  the  grip  of  the 
law  was  felt  so  severely,  that  the  entire  liquor  inte- 
rest combined  for  its  repeal. 

Party  ties  were  ignored,  tens  of  thousands  of  dol 
lars  were  raised,  “ Personal  Liberty  Leagues  ” were 
organized,  and  an  entire  political  campaign  was 
fought  on  the  liquor  question  by  the  liquor  in- 
terest. 

Prohibition  candidates  must  be  defeated  and  license 
men  elected.  Democrats  and  Republicans  threw 
aside  all  party  ties  and  party  interests,  united  to  ex- 
tend the  domain  of  alcohol,  and  shook  hands  across 
the  bloody  chasm.” 

If  any  link  was  wanting  in  the  chain  of  argument 
to  prove  Prohibition  not  a failure  but  a stern  reality, 
it  was  the  attitude  of  the  liquor-dealers  and  liquor 
drinkers  at  the  fall  election  of  1874,  when  they  forsook 
ail  party  ties  and  principles,  and  took  the  one  plank 
for  their  platform  to  “repeal  Prohibitory  law  and 
substitute  license.”  Liquor  triumphed,  and  license 
became  the  order  of  the  day.  The  State  constabulary 
and  Prohibitory  laws  were  at  once  repealed  by  the 
combined  liquor  interest.  The  charge  that  “ Prohi- 
bition is  a failure,”  in  view  of  the  above  facts,  is  so 
transparently  false  that  it  needs  no  argument  of  ours 
to  refute.  Prohibitionists  are  not  only  not  discour- 
aged by  the  action  in  Massachusetts,  but,  on  the 
contrary,  are  more  than  ever  convinced  of  the  justice 
of  their  cause,  and  of  the  feasibility  and  effectiveness 
of  the  Prohibitory  Law. 


90 


Prohibition  does  Prohibit, 


VERMONT. 

Governor  Peck,  a. so  Jud^e  of  the  Supreme  Court, 
said : 

“ In  some  parts  of  the  State  there  has  been  a laxity  in  en- 
forcing it,  but  in  other  parts  of  the  State  it  has  been  thoroughly 
enforced,  and  there  it  has  driven  the  traffic  out  I think  the 
influence  of  the  law  has  been  salutary  in  diminishing  drunken- 
ness and  disorders  arising  therefrom,  and  also  crimes  generally. 
You  cannot  change  the  habits  of  a people  momentarily.  The 
law  has  had  an  effect  upon  our  customs,  and  has  done  away 
with  that  of  treating  and  promiscuous  drinking.  The  law  has 
been  aided  by  moral  means,  but  moral  means  have  also  been 
wonderfully  strengthened  by  the  law. 

“ I think  the  law  is  educating  the  people,  and  that  a much 
larger  number  now  suppoi t it  than  ivhen  it  was  adopted;  in 
fact,  the  opposition  is  dying  out.  All  the  changes  in  the  law 
have  been  in  the  direction  of  greater  stringency.  In  attending 
court  for  ten  years,  I do  not  remember  to  have  seen  a drunkea 
man.” 

Governor  Convers  said  : 

“ The  prohibitory  law  has  been  in  force  about  twenty-two 
years.  The  enforcement  has  been  uniform  in  the  State  since 
its  enactment,  and  I consider  it  a very  desirable  law.  I think 
the  law  itself  educates  and  advances  public  sentiment  in  favor 
of  temperance.  There  is  no  question  about  the  decrease  in 
the  consumption  of  liquor.  I speak  from  personal  knowledge, 
having  always  liv^d  in  the  State.  I live  in  Woodstock,  sixty 
miles  from  here,  and  there  no  man  having  the  least  regard  foi 
himself  would  admit  selling  rum,  even  though  no  penalty  at- 
tached to  it.” 

W.  B.  Arcourt,  Associate  Justice  for  Washing-ton 
County,  said 

“ Public  sent  ment  is  growing  stronger  m favor  of  the  Ian 

every  year.” 


Prohibition  does  Prohibit. 


21 


St.  Johnsbury  has  5,000  population,  and  the  pro- 
hibitory law  has  been  strictly  enforced  for  many  years. 
There  is  no  bar,  no  dram-shop,  no  poor,  and  no  police- 
man walks  the  streets.  It  is  a workman’s  paradise. 

RHODE  ISLAND. 

At  a Convention  of  the  State  Temperance  Union, 
held  in  1874,  Gov.  Howard  in  an  address  said  : 

“ I stopped  short  without  recommending  particularly  the 
prohibitory  law.  I did  so  because  I was  not  fully  convinced 
that  it  was  the  best  remedy  to  be  found ; but  the  law  was 
adopted.  After  a long  time,  we  succeeded  in  selecting  such  a 
force  of  men  as  was  needed  to  execute  those  laws ; and  now, 
ladies  and  gentlemen,  I am  here  to-night  especially  for  the 
purpose  of  saying,  not  from  the  standpoint  of  a temperance 
man,  but  as  a public  man,  with  a full  sense  of  the  responsibility 
which  attaches  to  me  from  my  representative  position,  that  to- 
day the  prohibitory  laws  of  this  State,  if  not  a complete  suc- 
cess, are  a success  beyond  the  fondest  anticipation  of  any  friend 
of  temperance,  in  my  opinion. 

“ Ladies  and  gentlemen,  prohibitory  legislation  in  Rhode 
Island  is  a success  to  a marvellous  extent.  I have  desired,  I 
have  felt  it  incumbent  upon  me  to  make  that  declaration,  and  I 
desire  that  it  shall  go  abroad  as  my  solemn  assertion.” 

Although  the  recent  prohibitory  law  has  been  in 
operation  but  about  ten  months,  the  police  records 
of  the  two  principal  cities  show  that  the  law  has  had 
the  effect  to  notably  diminish  the  arrests  for  drunken- 
ness. The  Providence  Daily  Jsiirnal,  a few  months 
after  the  .aw  went  into  effect,  said  : 

“ Whatever  may  be  the  ultimate  results  of  the  prohibitory 
and  constabulary  acts,  it  cannot  be  denied  that  up  to  this  time 
their  working  has  been  rather  salutary.  There  may  be  as 
much  liquor  drunk  in  private  club-rooms  and  other  out-of-the- 
way  places  as-  formerly,  but  if  it  is  so  the  dealers  are  clearly 


22 


Prohibition  does  Prohibit. 


taking  pains  to  keep  their  workmanship  out  of  sight.  There 
has  not  been  for  years  such  an  exemption  from  the  indecencies 
of  intoxication  in  our  streets  and  the  highways  of  our  villages, 
as  we  have  enjoyed  for  the  last  two  months.” 

The  Providence  Temple  of  Honor  saj's  : 

“ Already  in  many  of  the  country  towns  have  the  good 
effects  of  the  prohibitory  law  been  seen  in  the  entire  closing  up 
of  the  places  where  intoxicating  liquors  have  been  formerly 
sold,  and  the  lessening  of  crime  and  disorder.  In  this  city 
there  have  been  fewer  arrests  from  the  effects  of  this  evil  than 
before  the  law  was  passed,  and  those  who  are  not  blind  to 
every  good  can  perceive  it.  The  croaking  of  some  advocates 
of  license  in  regard  to  club-rooms  amounts  nominally  to  no- 
thing.” 

At  the  annual  session  of  the  State  Temperance 
Union,  with  a large  attendance  of  delegates,  the  fol- 
lowing resolution  was  adopted: 

“ Whereas,  This  convention  is  fully  satisfied  tliat  the  pro- 
hibitory law  now  in  force  in  this  State  is  a grand  success,  and 
may  be  made  the  means  of  doing  away  with  the  liquor-traffic 
in  our  State  ; therefore, 

“ Resolved,  That  it  is  the  duty  of  every  temperance  man  to 
make  it  a point  to  present  himself  at  the  polls  and  vote  for 
those  men,  and  those  only,  who  are  pledged  to  its  support.” 

The  arrests  for  drunkenness  in  the  Cit}’’  of  Provi- 
dence for  the  nine  months  from  Jul}''  i,  1873,  to  March 
I,  1874,  under  license,  were  4,351,  while  from  July  i, 
1874,  to  March  i,  1875,  under  prohibition  they  were 
3,689.  The  difference  gives  662  in  favor  of  prohibi- 
tion. Fifteen  thousand  population  had  been  added  by 
the  annexation  of  North  Providence,  and  ti  ere  were 
quite  a number  of  unexpired  licenses  still  ir.  force, 
faking  into  account  both  these  facts,  there  was  a 
relative  decrease  of  1,283.  The  cominitnieats  to  the 


Prohibition  does  ^Prohibit, 


23 


workhouse  were  136  less  in  1874  under  prohibition 
than  in  1873  under  license.  The  commitments  of 
common  drunkards  116  less  in  1874  than  in  1873.  In 
Pau  tiicket,  the  arrests  for  drunkenness  were  158  less 
in  eight  months  under  prohibition  than  license,  and 
in  Newport  86. 

CONNECTICUT. 

The  State  enacted  a prohibitory  law  in  1854  by  a 
vote  of  148  to  61  in  the  House,  and  31  to  i in  the 
Senate,  which  went  into  operation  in  August. 
Governor  Dutton,  in  October,  1854,  said: 

“ The  law  has  been  thoroughly  executed  with  much  less  diffi- 
culty and  opposition  than  was  expected.  In  no  instance  has 
a seizure  produced  any  general  excitement.  Resistance  to  the 
law  would  be  unpopular,  and  it  has  been  found  in  vain  to  set 
it  at  defiance.” 

In  1855,  in  his  annual  message  to  the  General 
Assembly,  Governor  Dutton  said  : 

“ There  is  scarcely  an  open  grog-sliop  in  the  State,  the  jails 
are  fast  becoming  tenantless,  and  a delightful  air  of  security  is 
everywhere  enjoyed.’’ 

Governor  Miller,  in  1856,  said  : 

“ From  my  own  knowledge,  and  from  information  from  all 
parts  of  the  State,  I have  reason  to  believe  that  the  law  has 
been  enforced,  and  the  daily  traffic  in  liquors  has  been  broken 
up  and  abandoned.” 

The  New  Haven  Advocate  said  : 

“ From  all  parts  of  the  State  the  tidings  continue  to  come  tc 
us  of  the  excellent  workings  of  the  Connecticut  liquor  law. 
The  diminution  of  intemperance,  the  reduction  of  crime  and 
pauperism,  the  better  observance  of  the  Sabbath,  are  the 
themes  of  rejoicing  from  every  quarter.  Men  who  voted 
against  the  law,  and  who  have  been  its  bitter  opponents,  tue 
now  its  firm  friends.” 


24 


Prohibition  does  Prohibit. 


Rev.  W.  G.  Jones  of  Hartford,  in  1854,  said: 

“ Crime  has  diminished  at  least  seventy-five  per  cent.” 

Rev.  Mr.  Bush  of  Norwich  said  : “ The  jails  and 
ilms-houses  are  almost  empty.” 

Rev.  David  Hawley,  City  Missionary  of  Hartford, 
said 

“ That  since  the  prohibitory  law  went  into  eSeot  his  mission 
school  had  increased  more  than  one-third  in  number.  The 
little  children  that  used  to  run  and  hide  from  their  fathers  when 
they  came  home  drunk  are  now  well  dressed  and  run  out  to 
meet  them.” 

Mr.  Alfred  Andrews  of  New  Britain  said  : 

“ This  law  is  to  us  above  all  price  or  valuation.  Vice,  £rirae, 
rowdyism,  and  idleness  are  greatly  diminished,  while  virtue, 
morality,  and  religion  are  greatly  promoted.” 

Rev.  R.  H.  Main  of  Meriden,  Chaplain  of  the  Re- 
form School,  testified  that  “crime  had  diminished 
seventy-five  per  cent.” 

In  New  London  County  the  prison  was  empt3’and 
the  jailers  out  of  business. 

In  New  Haven  the  commitments  to  the  City  Prison 
for  crimes  arising'  from  intemperance  in  Jul\',  1854, 
under  a license  law,  were  50,  while  in  August,  under 
prohibition,  there  were  onl)'  15. 

In  the  City  Workhouse  there  were  73  in  July  to  15 
in  August,  making  a balance  of  92  in  both  institu- 
tions in  one  month  in  favor  of  prohibition. 

Similar  testimonies  were  received  from  all  the  prin- 
cipal towns  in  the  State,  giving  the  most  unqualified 
approval  of  the  law  and  admiration  of  its  happy 
results 

Rev.  Dr.  Bacon  of  New  Plaven,  after  the  law  had 
been  in  operation  one  year,  said  : 

“ The  operation  of  the  Prohibitory  Law  for  one  year  is  a 


Prohibition  does  Prohibit. 


25 


matter  of  observation  to  all  the  inhabitants.  Its  effect  in  pro- 
moting peace,  order,  quiet,  and  general  prosperity,  no  man 
can  deny.  Never  for  twenty  years  has  our  city  teen  so  quiet  as 
under  its  action.  It  is  no  longer  simply  a question  of  tempe- 
rance but  a governmental  question — one  of  legislative  fore- 
sight and  morality.” 

The  Legislature  of  1873  repealed  the  law,  however, 
subsituting  license,  and  the  official  records  show 
that  crime  increased  50  per  cent,  in  one  year  under 
license. 

At  a public  hearing  before  the  Legislative  Com- 
mittee in  1875,  Rev.  Mr.  Walker  of  Hartford  pre- 
sented official  returns  showing  that  crime  had 
increased  four  hundred  per  cent,  in  the  City  of 
Hartford  since  the  prohibitory  law  was  repealed. 

The  report  of  the  Secretary  of  State  shows  that 
there  was  a greater  increase  of  crime  in  one  year 
under  license  than  in  seven  years  under  Prohibition. 
The  report  says : 

“ The  whole  number  of  persons  committed  to  jail  during  the 
year  is  four  thousand,  lour  hundred  and  eighty-one  (4,481), 
being  one  thousand  four  hundred  and  ninety-six  (1,496)  more 
than  in  the  preceding  year. 

“ The  two  counties  most  clamorous  for  license  in  1872  show 
the  greatest  increase  of  the  crime  of  drunkenness  in  1874- 
Hartford  County  has  an  increase  of  commitments  for  drunken- 
ness of  115  per  cent.,  and  New  Haven  County  141  per.  cent. 
That  is,  Hartford  County  shows  215  commitments  for  drunk- 
enness this  year  for  every  100  made  two  years  ago,  and  New 
Haven  County  shows  241  for  every  100  of  two  years  ago.’’ 

HEW  YORK. 

In  1845,  a direct  vote  was  taken  for  and  against  li- 
cense. Four-fifths  of  the  towns  and  cities  voted  against 
it.  The  vote  stood  111,884  177*^83  against. 


26 


Prohibition  does  Prohibit. 


The  decision  of  the  people  was  not  consolidated  into 
law  at  this  time.  In  I854,  the  Legislature  passed  a 
prohibitory  law  in  both  branches  by  a large  majcrit)y 
but  it  was  vetoed  by  Governor  Seymour.  Hon,  Hyron 
H.  Clark,  the  ])rohibitory  candidate,  was  elected 
Governor  at  the  next  election,  and  in  1855  a prohibi- 
tory bill  passed  the  Senate,  21  to  ir,  and  the  House, 
80  to  45,  and  was  signed  by  the  Governor. 

It  never  had  a fair  trial.  The  courts  v/ere  appealed 
to,  and  it  was  very  soon  declared  unconstitutional. 
It  was  not  without  its  good  results  while  on  the 
statute-book.  Governor  Clark  in  his  message  to  the 
Legislature,  referring  to  the  law,  said  : 

“Notwithstanding  it  has  been  subjected  to  an  opposition 
■aiore  persistent,  unscrupulous,  and  defiant  than  is  often  incurred 
y an  act  of  legislation,  and  though  legal  and  magisterial  in- 
duence,  often  acting  unofficially  and  extra-judicially,  have 
combined  to  render  it  inoperative,  to  forestall  the  decision  of 
courts,  wrest  the  statute  from  its  obvious  meaning,  and 
create  a general  distrust  if  not  hostility  to  all  legislative  re- 
strictions of  the  traffic,  it  has  still,  outside  of  our  large  cities 
been  generally  obeyed.  The  influence  is  visible  in  a marked 
diminution  of  the  evils  it  sought  to  remedy.” 

The  New  York  Reformer  of  that  date  said : 

“This  law  has  done  a wonderful  -deal  of  good  since  it  went 
into  effect,  notwithstanding  the  herculean  efforts  of  its  foes  to 
render  nugatory  its  beneficent  provisions.” 

Every  possible  method  was  taken  by  its  opponents 
to  prevent  its  execution,  and  then  these  same  men 
cry  out  “the  law  is  a failure,”  and  do  all  they  can 
against  it. 

The  Metropolitan  Excise  Law  for  New  York  and 
Brooklyn,  passed  in  1866,  was  absolutely  prohibitory 
for  one  day  in  the  week.  Sunday  is  given  to  pro- 


Prohibition  does  Prohibit. 


27 


hibition.  This  law  had  the  grip  of  prohibition.  It 
closed  the  saloons  on  Sunday,  and  reduced  the  num- 
ber on  the  other  days  in  the  week  by  over  2,000.  It 
was  in  operation  thirty-one  months,  and  brought  in  a 
revenue  in  1866,  $1,274,155.26 ; in  1867,  $1,272,250- 
54;  in  1868,  $1,390,299.57;  making  a total  revenue  of 
$3,986,705.37.  The  total  receipts  for  the  twenty-five 
years  preceding  were  only  $747,331 . 17. 

The  first  thirteen  months  under  the  operation  of  the 
law  6,021  arrests  were  made  for  intoxication  on  the 
Tuesdays,  against  only  2,514  on  the  Sundays  of  the 
same  week,  showing  an  excess  of  3,507  of  Tuesday 
over  Sunday  arrests.  They  had  been  nearly  even 
previous  to  the  passing  of  the  law. 

From  January  i,  1867,  to  October  i,  1868,  there 
were  5,263  Sunday  arrests  to  11,034  Tuesday  arrests, 
showing  an  excess  of  5,771  in  favor  of  prohibition. 
During  all  the  time  of  the  operation  of  this  law,  the 
Sabbath  was  quiet  and  peaceable,  free  from  disorderly 
scenes  and  bacchanalian  revels.  The  testimony  of 
ministers,  religious  papers,  public  meetings  in  both 
cities,  was  hearty  and  enthusiastic  over  the  good 
results  of  the  law. 

The  liquor  dealers  knew  that  prohibition  prohibited 
effectually,  and  that  on  the  most  profitable  day  ol 
the  w’eek  for  them.  They  went  to  -work  at  once  to 
secure  its  repeal.  Large  sums  of  money  were 
raised  and  sent  all  over  the  State,  to  elect  a legisla- 
ture which  should  wipe  it  out  of  existence.  They 
raised  $50,000  and  went  to  Albany,  and  were  ready 
to  give  it  if  the  Sunday  prohibition  could  be  repealed. 
Had  the  law  been  a “ failure  ” they  could  have  saved 
their  money.  Had  “ more  liquor  been  sold  under 
prohibition  than  license,”  as  is  falsely  claimed,  they 
could  better  have  paid  their  money  to  have  kept  the 


28 


Prohibition  does  Prohibit. 


law  in  force.  This  law,  and  the  prompt  and  decided 
manner  in  which  it  was  executed  in  this  stronghold 
of  the  rum-power,  are  the  strongest  evidence  that 
prohibition  can  be  enforced  anywhere  in  the  country 
wherever  there  is  an  honest  effort  among  officials  to 
put  it  into  execution. 

VINELAND,  NEW  JEKSEY. 

The  city  of  Vineland  has  20  school-houses,  15 
manufactories,  12  churches,  10,000  people,  but  not  a 
grog-shop.  Absolute  prohibition  of  the  liquor-traf- 
fic is  the  law  of  this  city.  Mr.  Curtis,  the  constable 
and  overseer  of  the  poor,  in  his  last  annual  report, 
says  : 

“ Though  we  have  a population  of  ten  thousand  people,  for 
the  period  of  six  months  no  settler  or  citizen  of  Vineland  has 
received  relief  at  my  hands  as  overseer  of  the  poor.  Within 
seventy  days  there  has  been  only  one  case,  among  what  we  call 
the  floating  population,  at  the  expense  of  $4. 

“ During  the  entire  year  there  has  only  been  one  indictment, 
and  that  a trifling  case  of  battery  among  our  colored  popula 
tion. 

“ So  few  are  the  fires  in  Vineland  that  we  have  no  need  of  a 
fire  department.  There  has  been  only  one  house  burned  in  a 
year,  and  two  slight  fires,  which  were  soon  put  out. 

“ We  practically  have  no  debt,  and  our  taxes  are  only  one 
per  cent,  on  the  valuation. 

“The  police  expenses  of  Vineland  amount  to  $75  a year, 
the  sum  paid  to  me,  and  our  poor  expenses  a mere  trifle. 

“ I ascribe  this  remarkable  state  of  things,  so  nearly  ap- 
proaching the  golden  age,  to  the  industry  of  our  people  and 
the  absence  of  King  Alcohol.” 

PENNSYLVANIA. 

For  many  years  Potter  County  has  had  a prohibi- 
tory law  for  the  entire  county. 


Prohibition  does  Prohibit. 


29 


Hon.  John  S.  Mann,  speaking-  of  the  law,  says  : 

“ There  it  stands,  a shield  to  all  the  youth  of  the  county 
against  the  temptation  to  form  drinking  habits.  Under  its  be- 
nign influence  the  number  of  tipplers  is  steadily  decreasing,  and 
fewer  young  men  begin  to  drink  than  when  licensed  houses 
gave  respectability  to  the  habit.  There  are  but  few  people 
who  keep  liquor  in  their  houses  for  private  use,  and  there  is  no 
indication  that  the  number  of  them  is  increased  since  the  traf- 
fic was  prohibited.  The  law  is  as  readily  enforced  as  are  the 
laws  against  gambling,  licentiousness,  and  others  of  similar 
character. 

“ Its  effect  as  regards  crime  is  marked  and  conspicuous 
Our  jail  is  without  inmates^  except  the  sheri^,  for  more  than  half 
the  time.  When  liquors  were  legally  sold,  there  were  always 
more  or  less  prisoners  in  the  jail.” 

A local-option  law  passed  in  1873,  and  forty  coun- 
ties voted  for  prohibition.  The  law  was  in  full  ope- 
ration but  a little  over  a year,  when,  true  to  their  in- 
stincts, the  friends  of  the  liquor-traffic  repealed  it 
and  substituted  license.  But  the  testimony  that  the 
law  was  productive  of  great  good  comes  from  a great 
variety  of  sources. 

The  Commissioners  of  Public  Charities  of  the  State 
of  Pennsylvania  say : 

“The  effect  of  prohibitory  laws  is  strikingly  shown  by  the 
comparatively  vacant  apartments  in  the  jails  of  counties  where 
the  local-option  law  is  in  force.” 

This  is  the  unanimous  and  universal  testimony,  that 
the  jails,  prisons,  and  poor-ho  uses  are  emptied  wher- 
ever prohibition  is  in  force. 

The  Pittsburgh  Commercial  recently  published  a 
letter  from  Butler  County,  in  which  the  correspon- 
dent said : 

* We  have  now  had  two  weeks  of  free  rum,  and  once  more 


30 


Prohibition  does  Prohibit. 


tre  thus  remanded  back  to  the  customs  of  a past  age.  Every-- 
where  on  our  streets  may  be  seen  the  sad  effects  of  ‘ local- 
option  repeal  ’ ; but  we  must  grin  and  bear  it.” 

This  is  the  testimony  which  comes  uo  from  other 
parts  of  the  State  where  licenses  have  taken  the  place 
of  prohibition. 

MARYLAND. 

This  State  has  a local-option  law  concerning  cer- 
tain portions  of  territory,  and  several  counties  have 
voted  to  utterly  prohibit  the  traffic. 

Mr.  J.  N.  Emerson,  of  Denton,  writing  to  Hon.  W. 
Daniel,  President  of  the  State  Society,  saj’^s : 

“ There  is  not  a drop  of  alcoholic  stimulants  sold  in  this 
county,  and  the  contrast  between  the  past  and  present  is  a 
wonder  to  tliose  accustomed  to  behold  tlie  scenes  of  but  a few 
years  ago  and  now.  Instead  of  wranglings,  black  eyes,  and 
bloody  noses,  enmity  and  strife,  drunken  brawls  and  midnight 
debauchery,  we  have  a peaceful  and  quiet  community  here 
and  throughout  the  entire  county. 

“ At  the  late  sitting  of  the  grand  jury  for  this  county  there 
was  not  a single  case  of  assault  and  battery  before  them,  nor  a 
single  complaint  of  a violation  of  the  public  peace.  Our  jail 
is  without  a tenant,  and  has  been  for  the  past  six  months.  At 
the  recent  session  of  our  circuit  court,  had  it  not  been  for  the 
old  business  which  had  accumulated  under  the  whiskey  reign, 
the  term  would  not  have  lasted  three  days.  The  operation  of 
the  law  has  wrought  a complete  revolution  here,  and  it  is  the 
greatest  boon  ever  conferred  upon  our  people  by  legislative 
enactment.  It  is  a rare  sight  now  to  see  any  one  u-nder  the 
influence  of  strong  drink.  Before  the  operation  of  the  law,  it 
was  almost  an  hourly  occurrence  to  come  in  contact  with  some 
one  in  this  bestial  condition.” 

When  the  law  had  been  in  operation  but  about 
five  months  its  beneheial  effects  were  plainly  ceen. 
In  Talbot  County  they  had  discharged  the  last  in- 


Prohibition  does  Prohibit. 


31 


mate  of  the  jail,  and  the  jailer  had  gone  back  to 
work  on  his  farm.  Caroline  County  had  noi  a pri- 
soner in  its  jail.  The  bill  of  expenses  due  the  jailer 
in  Worcester  County  for  the  five  months  previous  to 
the  taking  effect  of  the  law  was  about  $800,  and  for 
the  five  months  after  but  $50.  Other  counties  gave 
correspondingly  good  results. 

GREELEY,  COLORADO. 

This  colony,  founded  upon  the  principles  of  Vine- 
land,  N.  J.,  has  a miscellaneous  population  of  about 
3,000,  and  there  is  not  a liquor-shop  allowed  in  the 
place.  There  are  no  poor,  no  police  needed,  and  pro- 
hibition has  been  not  only  a great  success  but  a great 
blessing.  A fair  was  held  shortly  after  the  colony 
was  founded,  and  $91  was  realized,  which  was  put 
into  a “poor  fund.”  Two  years  and  a half  passed, 
and  there  still  remained  $84  in  hand,  $7  onl}^  having 
been  used  for  the  support  of  the  “poor.” 

There  are  quite  a number  of  such  towns  now  in  the 
Western  States,  all  founded  and  carried  on  with  title- 
deeds  which  prohibit  the  sale  of  liquor,  and  such 
towns  excel  in  thrift,  prosperity,  and  good  morals 
far  above  liquor-selling  towns  in  the  same  region. 

ILLINOIS. 

Prohibition  prevails  in  Bavaria,  a town  of  3,000  in- 
habitants. There  is  not  a saloon  in  all  the  valley. 
The  results  are  thus  given  by  a correspondent,  who 
says 

“ The  sound  of  drunken  revelry  is  entirely  unknown  to 
many  of  the  peaceful  inhabitants,  and  the  sight  of  a reeling  sot 
in  the  streets  would  provoke  the  greatest  curiosity  and  amaze- 
ment, and  it  is  also  stated  upon  the  very  best  authority  that  a 
dram  cannot  be  obtained  from  any  of  the  drug-stores,  not  a 


32 


Prohibition  does  Prohibit, 


drop  of  liquor  in  any  form,  except  upon  the  prescription  of  a 
physician.  And  in  this  place  there  is  not  a pauper  or  a persoc 
requiring  assistance  from  his  fellows.  On  the  contrary,  almost 
to  a man,  the  people  of  the  town  own  the  houses  they  live  in, 
are  free  from  debts  of  all  kinds,  and  are  abundant.’y  able  to 
make  a good  living.” 

FOREIGN  TESTIMONY. 

Hon.  William  Fox,  ex-Prime  Minister  of  New 
Zealand,  who  visited  this  country  in  1875  and  at- 
tended the  Right  Worthy  Lodge  of  Good  Tem- 
plars and  the  National  Temperance  Convention  of 
Chicago,  on  his  return  to  London  had  a breakfast  ten- 
dered him  by  the  United  Kingdom  Alliance,  on 
which  occasion  he  gave  an  interesting  account  of 
his  visit  to  the  “ Maine-Law  Country.”  He  told  of 
his  travels  on  steamboats,  of  his  visit  to  Portland, 
Bangor,  Lewiston,  to  Neal  Dow,  and  Hon.  Win. 
P.  Frye,  also  his  visit  to  other  States  and  cities,  and 
how  he  acted  as  ” amateur  detective  ” trjdng  to  find 
“ liquor  and  drunkards,”  and  said  that  “ nowhere  could 
he  meet  with  either.”  He  then  visited  Mr.  Murray, 
the  British  Consul  at  Portland,  who  had  been 
quoted  in  England  as  declaring  the  prohibitory  law 
“ a failure.”  Mr.  Fox  gives  the  following  account  of 
the  interview. 

He  says : 

“ Having  an  introduction,  I went  down  to  Mr.  Murray,  the 
British  Consul.  I found  him  a most  courteous  gentleman. 
He  did  his  best  to  give  me  all  the  information  in  his  power, 
and,  finding  we  had  mutual  friends,  we  were  soon  on  a footing 
of  considerable  intimacy.  He  spoke  his  mind  to  me  without 
the  least  reserve,  and  allowed  me  to  argue  with  and  interro- 
gate him  to  any  extent  I pleased.  I am  bound  to  say  that  I 
think  he  entertains  very  strong  prejudices  on  the  question. 
Siakspere  tells  us  of  men  ‘ who  cannot  endur  e a harmless^ 


Prohibition  does  Prohibit, 


33 


necessary  cat.’  Now,  the  Maine  Law  seemed  to  be  Mr, 
Murray’s  harmless,  necessary  cat.  He  alleged  as  facts  all  the 
a,  priori  arguments  against  it,  such'as  that  it  made  men  hypo> 
crites,  was  one  law  for  the  rich  and  another  for  the  poor,  and 
so  forth.  But  when  I asked  him  for  facts,  he  seemed  at  a loss 
to  supply  them.  I called  his  attention  to  the  statistics  ad- 
duced, on  the  other  side,  such  as  those  contained  in  the 
Cloud  of  Witnesses’  and  other  documents,  and  I begged 
him  to  tell  me  whether  the  facts  stated  by  General  Neal  Dow 
and  others,  as  to  the  diminution  of  crime,  employing  of  per- 
sons, etc.,  were  true  or  not.  Mr.  Murray  candidiy  admitted 
that,  if  true,  they  went  far  to  prove  the  success  of  the  law. 
‘ Then,’  said  I,  ‘ will  you  tell  me  if  they  are  true  or  not  ? ’ 
Mr.  Murray  admitted  that  he  could  not,  and  that  he  had  no 
evidence  to  disprove  them.  The  result  of  our  interview  was 
to  leave  the  impression  on  my  mind  that  Mr.  Murray  was 
much  prejudiced  on  the  subject,  and  that  he  had  based  his 
opinions  chiefly  on  very  limited  observations  of  the  excep- 
tional condition  of  the  large  seaport  town  in  which  he  re- 
sided.” 

Mr.  Fox  gives  much  detail  of  his  travels,  and  suras 
up  as  follows  : 

“ To  sum  up  the  whole,  and  admitting  all  the  facts  I could 
get  from  Mr.  Murray,  I believe  the  condition  of  Che  States 
of  Maine  and  Vermont  to  be  much  as  follows : If  the  House 
of  Lords  and  the  House  of  Commons,  and  all  the  country 
justices,  mayors,  and  aldermen  of  Great  Britain,  and  a small 
number  of  the  lower  classes— perhaps  200,000  out  of  a popu- 
lation of  28,000,000 — drank,  and  all  the  rest  did  not,  you 
would  have  a state  of  things  analogous  here  to  what  they  are 
in  Maine  and  Vermont.  You  would  have  a very  small  frac- 
tion who  would  get  and  use  liquor,  furnishing  those  shocking 
examples  which  some  persons  are  in  the  habit  of  parad.ing 
before  us  as  existing  in  those  States,  but  the  whole  of  the  rest 
of  the  population  would  be  sober.  The  effect  on  their  geire* 
ral  condition  is  something  marvellous  : a total  absence,  exter* 


34 


Pro-hibition  does  Prohibit. 


nally  at  all  events,  of  all  those  vices  and  crimes  which  yon 
meet  with  amongst  drinking  populations,  which  is  very  agree- 
able and  very  surprising.  The  impression  left  on  my  mind  by 
my  visit  to  these  States  was  a full  confirmation  of  the  state- 
ments made  to  you  by  the  Hon.  General  Neal  Dow  and  the 
documents  which  have  been  put  forth : that  in  ilaine  and 
Vermont,  on  the  whole,  the  prohibitory  law  has  been  a great 
success,  notwithstanding  that  it  has  been  more  difficult  to  carry 
out  because  of  its  non-permissive  character.” 

PROVINCE  OF  CANTERBURY,  ENGLAND. 

In  February,  1869,  a Committee  of  the  Lower 
House  of  Convocation  of  the  Province  of  Canter- 
bury reported  1,475  parishes  where  prohibition  pre- 
vails, and  sa}'-  that 

“ Few,  it  may  be  believed,  are  cognizant  of  the  fact — which 
has  been  elicited  by  the  present  enquiry — that  there  are  at  this 
time,  within  the  Province  of  Canterbury,  upwards  of  one  thou- 
sand parishes  in  which  there  is  neither  public-house  nor  beer- 
shop,  and  where,  in  consequence  of  the  absence  of  these 
inducements  to  crime  and  pauperism,  according  to  the  evi- 
dence now  before  the  committee,  the  intelligence,  morality, 
and  comfort  of  the  people  are  such  as  the  friends  of  temperance 
would  have  anticipated.” 

A writer  in  the  Edinburgh  Reviezv  for  January, 
1873,  says: 

“ We  have  seen  a list  of  eighty-nine  estates  in  England  and 
Scotland  where  t-he  drink-traffic  has  been  altogether  suppressed, 
with  the  very  happiest  social  results.  The  late  Lord  Palmer- 
ston suppressed  the  beer-shops  in  Romsey  as  the  leases  fell 
in.  We  know  an  estate  which  stretches  for  miles  along  the 
romantic  shore  of  Loch  Fyne  where  no  whiskey  is  allowed  to 
be  sold.  The  peasants  and  fishermen  are  flourishing.  They 
all  hate  tlreir  money  in  the  bank,  and  they  obtain  higher 
wages  than  their  neighbors  when  they  go  to  sea.” 


35 


Prohibitio7i  does  Prohibit, 

SALTATRE,  YORKSHIRE,  ENGLAND. 

Prohibition  has  prevailed  for  many  years,  and  not 
a beer-shop  or  beer-house  exists.  The  Daily  Tele- 
graph says : 

“ In  short,  the  stage  of  experiment  has  been  long  passed  ; 
the  scheme  has  survived  open  hostility,  envy  and  detraction, 
and  is  now  a brilliant  success.” 

■ BESSBROOK,  IRELAND. 

Bessbrook,  a town  in  Ireland,  of  4,000  inhabitants, 
has  no  liquor-shop,  and  whiskey  and  strong  drink  are 
Btrictl}"  prohibited.  There  is  no  poor-house,  pawn- 
shop, or  police  station.  The  town  is  entirely  free 
from  strife,  discord,  or  disturbance. 

TYRONE  COUNTY,  IRELAND. 

I 

This  county  contains  61  square  miles  and  10,000 
people.  No  public-house  is  allowed.  Right  Hon. 
Lord  Claude  Hamilton,  late  M.  P.,  said  in  1870: 

“At  present  there  is  not  a single  policeman  in  that  district. 
The  poor-rates  are  half  what  they  were  before,  and  the  magis- 
trates testify  to  the  great  absence  of  crime.” 

A year  or  two  before  his  death.  Father  Mathew 
in  a letter  to  Mr.  Delavan,  said  : 

The  principle  of  prohibition  seems  to  me  to  be  the  on’y 
safe  and  certain  remedy  for  the  evils  intemperance.  This 
opinion  has  been  strengthened  and  confirmed  by  the  hard 
labor  of  more  than  twenty  years  in  the  temperance  cause.” 

COMPARISONS. 

In  Maine,  under  prohibition,  the  convictions  for 
crime,  in  1870,  amounted  to  431,  or  one  for  every 
1,689  r.ouls;  while  in  New  York,  exclusive  of  the 
city,  the  number  of  convictions  was  5,473  ; or  one  in 
620  souls. 


36 


Prohibition  doa  Prohibit. 


In  Boston,  the  Chief  of  Police  reports  that  for  the 
.ast  quarter  of  1867,  when  the  State  was  under  pro- 
hibitory law,  the  number  of  arrests  was  i;530, 
lodgers,  2,617 — total,  4,147;  wdiile  in  the  correspoiid- 
ing  quarter  of  1868,  under  license,  the  number  of  ar- 
rests was  5,596,  lodgers,  7,617 — total,  13,212,  or  9,066 
more  under  license  than  prohibition. 

Mr.  Garrison  gives  the  following  facts  to  the 
“solid  men  of  Boston  ” : 

“From  November  to  May,  1868,  after  the  election,  the  sale 
of  liquor  was  unrestricted.  During  that  year  there  was  a fall- 
ing off  in  the  valuation  of  the  State  as  compared  with  the 
two  previous  years  of  nearly  $33,000,000,  most  of  which  was 
in  personal  property.  During  the  two  years  of  prohibition  the 
personal  property  of  the  State  increased  nine  and  a half  pcf 
cent.;  in  1868,  under  the  license  lawn  it  increased  two  and 
two  thirds  percent.  From  i860  to  1865,  Boston  increased  her 
valuation  $12,000,000  annually;  while  from  1865  to  1867, 
during  two  years  of  prohibition,  the  increase  reached  $36,500,- 
000  annually.  During  the  two  years  of  prohibition  her  in- 
crease was  7 per  cent.,  but  last  year,  under  license,  only  I3 
per  cent. 

PROHIBITION  AND  UNITED  STATES 
REVENUE. 

The  United  States  Commissioner  of  Internal  Re 
venue,  in  his  official  report  for  1873,  under  the  head 
of  “ Fermented  Liquors,”  notes  the  fact,  as  part  of 
the  history  of  that  fiscal  year,  that  during  the  year 
])rohibitory  legislation  in  some  portions  of  the  coun- 
try materially  lessened  the  quantity  of  beer  manu- 
factured and  sold.  He  says: 

“ Within  the  fiscal  year  ended  June  30,  1873,  in  portions  of 
the  country  the  sale  of  fermented  liquors  was  prohibited  by 
State  enactments,  and,  niivilers  of  Ireioeries  ucre  thus  cut  short, 
by  other  than  business  causes  of  the  time  witJun  the  year  during 


Prohibition  does  Prohibit. 


37 


^vTlkh  IHEY  WOULD  OTHERWISE  HAVE  CONTINUED  TO  OPERATE, 
and  th« ’production  of  those  contiwaing  to  manufacture  in  the  States 
referred  to  has  BEEN  materially  lessened.” 

This  valuable  official  testimony  was  given  wholly 
irrespective  of  the  merits  or  demerits  of  prohibitory 
legislation  as  such,  and  solely  with  reference  to  its 
effect  upon  the  public  revenue  in  cutting  short 
breweries  and  diminishing  the  quantity  of  beer 
manufactured  and  sold,  and  is  therefore  all  the 
more  significant. 

PROHIBITION  AND  LICENSE. 


The  following  significant  figures,  contrasting  sev« 
eral  States  under  prohibitory  and  license  legislation, 
are  compiled  from  the  U.  S.  Census  of  187O  and  the 
U.  S.  Internal  Revenue  Report  of  1874. 

Ohio  is  classed  under  license,  for  although  she  has 
a prohibition  clause  in  her  constitution,  it  is  not 
enforced. 


REVENUE  ON  SPIRITS  IN  1 874. 


Population. 


Maine  (under  prohibition) 626,915 

Maryland  (under  license)  780,894 

Vermont  (under  prohibition) 330>55i 

New  Jersey  (under  license) 906,096 

Massachusetts  (under  prohibition) i,4S7,35i 

Ohio  (under  license) 2,665,260 

New  Plampshire  (under  prohibition)..  318,300 

Indiana  (under  license) 1,680637 

Michigan  (under  prohibition 1,184,059 

Illinois  (under  license) 2,539,891 


Revenue. 
$37,172  75 
1,070,353  85 
14,969  75 
293.187  57 
1,667,356  37 
10,743,046  94 
75,278  19 
4,257,636  35 
267,109  03 
12,411,924  62 


The  five  prohibitory  States,  Maine,  Vermont, 
Massachusetts  (part  of  the  year  under  beer  license), 
Kew  Hampshire,  and  Michigan,  during  the  fiscal 


38 


Prohibition  does  Prohibit. 


year  ending  June  3O,  1874,  v/ith  an  aggregate  popu 
lation  of  3,917.176;  paid  a revenue  tax  on  spirits  tG 
the  amount  of  $2,061,886  09.  The  five  license  States, 
Maryland,  New  Jersey,  Ohio,  Indiana,  and  Illinois, 
during  the  same  period,  with  an  aggregate  popula- 
tion of  8,572,778,  paid  $28,781,149  33.  With  a little 
more  than  twice  the  population  of  the  prohibitory 
States,  the  five  license  States  paid  nearly  fourteen 
times  as  much  revenue  tax  on  spirits. 

Hon.  D.  D.  Pratt,  Commissioner  of  Internal  Re- 
venue, wrote  the  following  letter  to  Geo.  Shepard 
Page,  Esq.,  ol  New  Jersey: 


Washington,  June  16,  1875. 

•Sir;  In  reply  to  your  letter  (not  dated)  just  received  at  this 
office  asking  for  the  amount  of  production  of  fermented  liquors 
in  Jlaine  tor  1873  and  1874,  also  for  the  amount  of  revenue 
returned  from  Maine  and  New  Jersey  derived  from  the  manu- 
facture and  sale  of  spirituous  and  malt  liquors  for  the  past  five 
years,  I beg  to  transmit  the  following  statements,  showing  the 
returns  from  all  sources  relating  to  distilled  spirits  and  fer- 
mented liquors,  for  the  several  fiscal  years  ending  June  30,, 
1870,1  871,  1872  1873  and  1874. 


riscai  year 
ending 

. Ma 

i’ermented 

lUE.— — — V 

Distilled 

■ NEW  J 

Fermented 

EBSET. — » 

Distilled 

June  30 

liquors. 

spirits. 

liquors. 

spirits. 

1870..  . 

$4,233  95 

$90,640  56 

$439,2.15  63 

$443,960  30 

1671.... 

9,090  03 

73,528  17 

617,555  83 

385,653  S3 

1872.... 

7,494  89 

77,751  99 

573,452  19 

442,472  79 

1873  ... 

9.410  19 

81,114  80 

605,746  11 

773,188  44 

1874.... 

14,335  94 

37,172  75 

566,717  95 

293,187  57 

•‘The  number  of  Darrels  of  fermented  liquors  on  which  the  tax 
was  paid  in  Maine  in  I873  and  I874  was  5,043  and  11,447 
le^pectively.  Respectfully, 

“ D.  D.  PraIT,  Commissioner.” 


Prohibition  does  Prohibit* 


39 


BEER  BREWERS’  TESTIMONY. 

In  the  Fifteenth  Annual  Report  of  the  United  States  Brew- 
ers’ Association,  held  at  Cincinnati  in  June,  1875,  a great  wail 
was  sent  up  on  account  of  prohibitory  laws.  The  following 
are  two  of  the  resolutions  against  prohibition  which  were 
adopted . 

“ Besolved,  That  where  restrictive  and  prohibitory  enactments  exist, 
every  possible  measure  be  taken  to  oppose,  resist,  and  repeal  them  ; 
and  it  is  further 

“ Besolved,  That  politicians  favoring  prohibitory  enactments,  who 
offer  themselves  as  candidates  for  office,  be  everywhere  strenuously  opposed, 
and  the  more  so  if  it  be  found  that  their  personal  habits  do  not  conform  with 
their  public  profession.” 

The  President  of  the  Brewers’  Congress  declared  that  pro- 
hibition “ has  failed,  and  will  ever  fail.” 

Fred.  Lauer,  Chairman  of  the  Agitation  Committee,  declared 
that  “the  evils  of  intemperance  could  not  be  cured  by  prohibi- 
tory laws.” 

The  ofllcial  reports,  however,  showed  that  there  had  been  a 
reduction  in  the  number  of  breweries  during  the  year  of 
“nearly  thirty  per  cent.”  There  were  3,554  in  1873,  and  only 
2,524  in  1874.  J There  was  also  a decrease  of  30,194  barrels  manu- 
factured during  the  year. 

ilr.  Louis  Schade,  of  Washington,  D.  C.,  editor  of  the 
Washington  Sentinel,  and  the  special  agent  of  the  Brewers’ 
Congress  in  Washington,  in  an  address  before  the  Convention 
explained  the  cause  of  the  reduction.  "We  copy  the  following 
from  his  address  : 

“ Very  severe  is  the  injury  which  the  brewers  have  received  in  the 
so-called  temperance  States.  The  local-option  law  of  Pennsylvania 
reduced  the  number  of  breweries  in  that  State  from  500  in  1S73  to  346 
in  1874,  thus  destroying  154  breweries  in  one  year.  In  Michigan  it 
is  even  worse  ; for  of  202  breweries  in  1873,  only  68  remained  in  1S74. 

1 1 Ohio  the  crusaders  destroyed  68  out  of  296.  In  Indiana-  the  Bax- 
ter law  stopped  66  out  of  158.  In  Maryland  the  breweries  were 
reduced  from  y.j  to  15,  some  few  of  those  stopped  lying  in  those  coun- 
ties in  which  they  have  a local-option  law.  We  sincerely  hope  that 


40 


Prohibition  does  Prohibit, 


the  Maryland  Democracy , which  had  yielded  too  much  to  the  woman 
crusaders,  will  ta;m  an  early  opportunity  to  eradicate  that  unjust  law 
which  permits  the  people  of  a portion  of  the  State  to  be  put  under  the  tyranny 
and  despotism  of  those  fanatics.” 

Mr.  Schade  also  refers  to  the  reduction  of  the  number  of 
barrels  manufactured  during  the  year  of  35,966  in  Pennsyl- 
vania, and  ” in  Massachusetts,  in  consequence  of  the  prohibi- 
tory law,  of  116,585.”  He  then  refers  to  the  increase  in  certain 
States,  and  speaking  of  the  general  reduction  throughout  the 
jountry,  says: 

“There  is  no  doubt  that  the  temperance  agitation  and  prohibitory 
laws  are  the  chief  causes  of  the  decrease  compared  to  the  preceding 
year.  Had  our  friends  in  Massachusetts  been  free  to  carry  on  their 
business,  and  had  not  the  State  authorities  constantly  interfered  with  the  lat- 
ter, there  is  no  doubt  that  instead  of  showing  a decrease  of  1 16, 5 8y  bar- 
rels in  one  year,  they  would  have  increased  at  the  same  rate  as  they  did  the 
pieceding  year.” 

This  strong  and  emphatic  ofhcial  testimony  of  our  opponents 
is  the  strongest  in  the  already  overwhelming  chain  of  testimony 
presented,  proving  beyond  doubt  or  cavil  that  prohibition  does 
prohibit. 

We  could  accumulate  equally  reliable  and  em- 
phatic testimony  from  a large  number  of  conscien- 
tious and  disinterested  witnesses  sufficient  to  fill  a 
small  volume,  but  enough  has  been  given  to  prove 
beyond  cavil  that  “prohibition  does  prohibit.”  We 
have  summoned,  as  witnesses,  Governors,  United 
States  Senators,  Representatives  in  Congress,  Clerg}- 
men.  Attorneys  general.  Judges  of  Supreme  Courts, 
Secretaries  of  State,  State  Constables,  Ma3’ors  of 
cities.  Chaplains  of  prisons.  Chiefs  of  police.  Editors, 
Internal  Revenue,  prison,  and  poor-house  statistics, 
all  of  which  give  united  testimony  to  the  benelicicnt 
effects  of  prohibition.  The  liquor  interest  is  united, 
determined,  and  persistent  against  prohibition.  This 
fact  alone  speaks  volumes  for  the  law. 


Prohibition  does  Prohibit, 


41 


A certain  class  of  “ moderate  drinkers”  are  also 
opposed  to  prohibition.  A recent  writer  on  the 
“Moraity  of  Prohibitory  Laws”  denounces  them 
as  “ frauds,”  “ a hell  on  earth,”  and  says  they  have 
“ uniformly  failed.”  * 

The  same  writer  reveals  his  own  position  by  say- 
ing that  “ the  desire  for  the  firr^.  glass  of  liquor  is  le- 
gitimate” and  that  ” the  traffic  is  necessary.”  Of 
course  all  his  instincts  and  habits  are  against  prohi- 
bition, and  his  “ morality”  takes  shape  accordingly. 
He  lived  in  a prohibitory  State,  declared  the  law 
uniformly  a failure,  but  says  he  “ was  obliged  to  send 
to  New  York  about  this  time  for  a jug  of  cooking 
wine.” 

And  yet  “ prohibition  is  a failure,”  we  are  told.  It 
“ failed”  to  allow  the  “ traffic”  to  supply  the  “ first 
glass.”  We  accept  the  “ failure,”  and  sincerely  wish  it 
might  stop  the  sale  of  the  last  glass  also. 

But  we  are  told  that  in  Ohio,  Michigan,  and  some 
other  States  where  prohibition  is  in  the  State  con- 
stitution, liquor  is  freely  sold,  and  the  laws  are  not 
enforced.  This  is  undoubtedly,  true,  but  it  proves 
nothing  against  the  law,  and  only  shows  that  the  po- 
litical parties  whose  representatives  are  in  office  and 
refuse  to  execute  the  law  are  “failures.”  But  the 
laws  are  not  failures^even  in  those  States  where  they  are 
not  executed. 

Whea  the  crusading  women  visited  the  open  sa- 
loons and  pleaded  with  their  keepers  to  close  their 
dens  of  iniquity  and  shame  and  stop  their  devastating 
business,  they  could  not  point  to  the  broad  seal  of 
the  State  as  sanctioning  and  licensing  them  as  they  did 
in  other  States,  and  hence  it  was  that  “moral  sua- 
sion” had  so  much  more  effect  in  these  prohibitory 
States.  Hence  it  is  that  the  liquor  interest  in  Ohio, 


42  ProhihitioTi  does  Prohibit. 

Michigan,  and  Iowa  has  recently  made,  and  i8 
making,  most  desperate  efforts  to  remove  from  the 
statute-book  all  laws  condemning  .and  prohibiting 
traffic  and  substituting  something  which  shall  license 
and  sanction  the  demoralizing  sale  of  the  “infernal 
stuff.” 

It  was  not  our  intention  to  give  arguments  in  favor 
of  prohibition,  but  only  to  collect  in  convenient  and 
connected  form  some  of  the  many  proofs  in  relation 
to  the  workings  of  the  law  wherever  enforced. 
Enough,  however,  has  been  given  to  demonstrate 
that,  to  the  extent  it  has  been  tried,  prohibition  has 
always  proved  a beneficient  policy,  eminently  success- 
ful as  a means  for  the  suppression  of  the  liquor-traf- 
fic. One  important  fact  has  been  developed  in  this 
investigation,  which  is,  that  wherever  prohibition 
abounds,  moral  suasion  much  more  abounds.  Taken 
separately,  either  is  weak  and  finds  its  efforts  neutra- 
lized and  to  a great  extent  baffled.  But  united 
“ faith  and  works”  go  hand  in  hand  to  full  deliv  erance 
and  assured  ultimate  triumph. 


Prohibition  does  Prohibit.  43 

PROHIBITION  CONSTITUTIONAL. 

The  constitutionality  of  prohibitory  lawi  has  been 
settled  by  the  highest  tribunals.  The  following  ex- 
tracts are  from  the  records  of  the  Supreme  Court  of 
the  United  States : 

Chief-Justice  Taney  said : 

" If  any  State  deems  the  retail  and  internal  traffic  in  ardent 
spirits  injurious  to  its  citizens,  and  calculated  to  produce  idle- 
ness, vice,  or  debauchery,  I see  nothing  in  the  Constitution  of 
the  United  States  to  prevent  it  from  regulating  or  restraining 
the  traffic,  or  from  prohibiting  it  altogether,  if  it  thinks  pro- 
per.’’— 5 Howard,  577. 

Justice  McLean  said : 

‘A  license  to  sell  an  article,  foreign  or  domestic,  as  a mer- 
chant, or  inn  keeper,  or  victualler,  is  a matter  of  police  and 
revenue,  within  the  power  of  the  State.” — 5 Howard  589.  And 
again:  “ It  is  the  settled  construction  of  every  regulation  of 
commerce  that,  under  the  sanction  of  its  general  laws,  no  per- 
son can  introduce  iato  a community  malignant  diseases,  or 
anything  which  contaminates  its  morals  or  endangers  its 
safety.’’ — Ibid.  “ If  the  foreign  articles  be  injurious  to  the 
health  or  morals  of  the  community,  a State  mav.  in  the  exer- 
cise of  that  great  and  comprehensive  police  power  which  lies 
at  the  foundation  of  its  prosperity,  prohibit  the  sah  of  it. — Ibid. 
592.  “No  one  can  claim  a license  to  retail  spirits  as  a matter 
of  right.” — Ibid.  597. 

Justice  Daniel  said  of  imports  that  are  cleared  of 
all  control  of  the  government  which  permits  their  in- 
troduction : 

“ They  are  like  all  other  property  of  the  citizen,  and  should 
be  equally  the  subjects  of  domestic  regulation  and  taxation, 
whether  owned  by  an  importer  or  his  vender,  or  may  have 
been  purchased  by  cargo,  package,  bale,  piece,  or  yard,  or  by 
hogsheads,  casks,  or  bottles.”— 5 Howard,  614.  lu  answering 
the  argument  that  the  importer  purchases  the  right  to  sell  when 


44 


Prohibition  does  Prohibit. 


he  pays  duties  to  the  Government,  Justice  Daniels  continues  to 
Bay  : “ No  such  right  as  the  one  supposed  is  purchased  hy  the 
importer,  and  no  injury  in  any  accurate  sense  is  inflicted  on 
hun  by  denying  to  him  the  power  demanded.  He  has  not 
purchased  and  cannot  purchase,  Irom  the  Government  that 
which  it  could  not  ensure  to  him — a sale  ivdependently  of  the 
laws  and  folicy  of  the  States.'’ — Ibid.  6i6, 

Justice  Woodbury  said  . 

“ After  articles  have  come  within  the  territorial  limits  of 
States,  whether  on  land  or  water,  the  destruction  itself  of  what 
constitutes  disease  and  death,  and  the  longer  continuance  of 
such  articles  within  their  limits,  or  the  terms  and  conditions  of 
their  continuance,  when  conflicting  with  their  legitimate  police, 
or  with  their  power  over  internal  commerce,  or  with  their  right 
of  taxation  over  all  persons  and  property  within  their  juris- 
diction, seems  one  of  the  first  principles  of  State  sovereignty, 
and  indispensible  to  public  safety,” — 5 Howard.,  630. 

Justice  Grier  said : 

“It  is  not  necessary  to  array  the  appalling  statistics  of 
misery,  pauperism,  and  crime  which  have  their  origin  in  the 
use  and  abuse  of  ardent  spirits.  The  police  power,  which  is 
exclusivel}’'  in  the  State,  is  competent  to  the  correction  of  these 
great  evils,  and  all  measures  of  restraint  or  prohibition  neces- 
sary to  effect  that  purpose  are  within  the  scope  of  that  author- 
ity : and  if  a loss  of  revenue  should  accrue  to  the  United  States 
from  a diminished  consumption  of  ardent  spirits,  she  will  be  a 
gainer  of  a thousand-fold  in  the  health,  wealth,  and  happiness  of 
the  people.” — Ibid.  532. 

RECENT  OPINIONS. 

While  alcoholic  stimulants  are  recognized  as  pro- 
peity,  and  entitled  to  the  protection  of  law,  owner- 
ship in  them  is  subject  to  such  restraints  as  are  de- 
demanded  by  the  highest  considerations  of  public  ex- 
pediency. Such  enactments  are  regarded  as  police 


Prohihitio7i  does  Prohibit. 


45 


Yegulatlons,  established  for  the  prevention  of  pauper- 
ism and  crime,  for  the  abatement  of  nuisances,  and 
the  promotion  of  public  health  and  safety.  They  are 
a just  restraint  of  an  injurious  use  of  property  which 
tlie  legislature  has  authority  to  impose,  and  the  ex- 
tent to  which  such  interference  may  be  carried  must 
rest  exclusively  in  legislative  wisdom  where  it  is  not 
controlled  by  fundamental  law.  It  is  a settled  prin- 
ciple, essential  to  the  rights  of  self-preservation  in 
every  organized  community,  that,  however  absolute 
may  be  the  owner’ s title  to  his  property,  he  holds  it 
under  the  implied  condition  ‘‘that  its  use  shall  not 
work  injury  to  the  equal  enjoyment  and  safety  of 
others  who  have  an  equal  right  to  the  enjoyment  of 
their  property,  nor  be  injurious  to  the  community,” 
— Supreme  Court  New  Jersey,  1872. 

“ Possessed  of  the  power  of  absolute  prohibition  under 
the  ConstiUition,  it  seems  to  follow  that  any  relaxation 
from  a plenary  exercise  of  such  power,  or  qualified 
or  conditional  enactment  by  the  legislature,  by  which 
license  to  sell  may  be  obtained  in  the  way  and  sub- 
ject to  the  liabilities  imposed  by  the  act,  cannot  be 
an  encroachment  pf  legislative  authority,  unless,  in- 
deed, the  legislature  should  transcend  some  settled 
principles  of  fundamental  law  respecting  the  trial  or 
mode  of  prosecution  or  punishment  of  the  party 
charged  with  an  infraction  of  the  provisions  of  the 
act.  or  with  having  incurred  some  liability  under  it. 
Acting  in  obedience  to  those  fundamental  principles, 
in  accordance  with  which  the  guilt  or  liability  of  the 
party  charged  must  first  be  ascertained  and  -estab- 
lished, and  the  judgment  of  the  law  rendered  against 
him,  it  seems  competent  for  the  legislature  to  attach 
such  consequences,  civil  or  criminal,  to  the  mere  act 


46 


Prohibition  does  Prohibit. 


of  sale  as  it  pleases,  even  when  such  sale  is  made  in 
pursuance  of  an  authority  of  the  legislature  qualified 
or  given  for  that  purpose.  Empowered  to  prohibit  en- 
tirely, the  legislature  may  license  stib  modo,  or  con- 
ditionally only.” — Wisconsin  Sicpr erne  Court,  I873. 

"Under  what  is  called  the  police  power,  the  legis- 
lature has  the  right  to  authorize  the  abatement  of  a 
public  nuisance ; and  the  carrying  on  of  an  illegal 
traffic  in  intoxicating  liquors,  and  the  assembling  of 
idle  and  vicious  persons  for  that  purpose  is  a nui- 
sance, and  may  be  so  declared  and  abated  according 
to  law. — Illinois  Supreme  Court,  1873. 

“ In  the  exercise  of  its  police  power,  a State  has 
full  pov/er  to  prohibit,  under  penalties,  the  exercise 
of  any  trade  or  employment  which  is  found  to  be 
hazardous  or  injurious  to  its  citizens  and  destructive 
to  the  best  interests  of  society,  without  providing 
compensation  to  those  upon  whom  the  prohibition 
rests.” — Michigan  Supreme  Court,  The  People  vs.  Haw- 
ley. ^ ^ 

PROHIBITION  TRIUMPHANT  IN  MAINE. 

Ex-Governor  Dingley,  of  Maine,  recently  published 
the  following  statistics  to  show  the  great  value  of  prohi- 
bition to  his  native  State  : 

‘‘  In  1830,  thirteen  distilleries  in  the  State  manufactur- 
ed one  million  gallons  of  rum  (two  gallons  to  each  in. 
habitant),  together  with  300,000  gallons  imported — not 
including  cider  and  other  fermented  liquors.  Now 
there  is  not  a distillery  or  brewery  in  the  State.  In 
1833  there  were  500  taverns,  a l but  40  of  them 
having  open  bars.  Now  there  is  not  a tavern  in  the 


Prohibition  does  Prohibit. 


47 


State  with  an  open  bar,  and  not  one  in  ten  of  them 
sells  liquor  secretly.  In  1830  every  store  sold  liquor 
as  freely  as  molasses  ; now,  not  one. 

“ In  1832,  with  a population  of  only  450,000,  there 
were  2,000  places  where  intoxicating-  liquors  were 
sold— one  grog-shop  to  every  225  of  the  population. 
Their  sales  amounted  to  $10,000,000  annualljq  or  $20 
for  each  inhabitant.  Last  year  the  aggregate  sales 
of  100  town  agencies  was  $100,000,  or  fifteen  cents 
per  inhabitant.  Including  clandestine  sales,  even  the 
enemies  of  temperance  do  not  claim  that  the  aggre- 
gate sales  in  the  State  exceed  $1,000,000,  less  than  $2 
per  inhabitant.  This  is  but  07ie-tenth  what  the  sales 
were  forty  years  ago,  and  but  one-eighth  what  they 
are  on  the  average  in  the  remainder  of  the  Union, 
which  is  $16  per  inhabitant.  Liquor-selling  is  almost 
wholly  confined  to  the  five  or  six  cities  of  the  State, 
so  that  hard  drinkers  are  compelled  to  journey  thither 
for  their  drams.  Hence  most  of  the  drunkenness  of 
the  State  is  concentrated  in  those  cities  where  the 
police  arrest  all  persons  under  the  influence  of  strong 
drink,  making  the  number  of  arrests  for  drunkenness 
seem  large  in  comparison  with  places  where  few 
arrests  are  made  for  this  offense. 

“ In  1855  there  were  10,000  persons  (one  out  of 
every  forty-five  of  the  population)  accustomed  to  get 
beastly  drunk;  there  were  200  deaths  from  delirium 
tremens  annually  (equivalent  to  300  now)  ; there  were 
1,500  paupers  (equivalent  to  2,200  now)  made  thus  by 
drink ; there  were  300  convicts  in  the  State  prison 
and  jails  (equivalent  to  450  now) ; and  intemperance 
was  destroying  a large  proportion  of  the  homes 
throughout  the  State.  Now  not  one  in  300  of  the 
population  is  a drunkard — not  one-sixth  as  many; 
the  deaths  from  de.iriura  tremens  annual  ty  are  not 


48 


Prohibition  does  Prohibit. 


fifty;  and  criminals  and  paupers  (not  including  rumselU 
ers)  are  largely  reduced,  notwithstanding  the  great 
mfiux  of  foreigners  and  tramps.” 


DECLARATION  OF  PRINCIPLES. 

The  following  is  the  Declaration  of  the  United  King- 
dom Alliance  of  Great  Britain  in  relation  to  the  liquor* 
traffic : 

1.  That  it  is  neither  right  nor  politic  for  the  state  to  afford 
legal  protection  and  sanction  to  any  traffic  or  system  that  tends 
to  increase  crime,  to  waste  the  national  resources,  to  corrupt 
the  social  habits,  and  to  destroy  the  health  and  live:  of  the 
people. 

2.  That  the  traffic  in  intoxicating  liquors,  as  common  beve- 
rages, is  inimical  to  the  true  interests  of  individuals  and  de-  I 
structive  of  the  order  and  welfare  of  societ}',  and  ought,  there- 
fore, to  be  prohibited. 

3.  That  the  history  and  results  of  all  past  legislation  in  regard 
to  the  liquor-traffic  abundantly  prove  that  it  is  iinposs’.ble  satis- 
factorily to  limit  or  regulate  a sj^stem  so  essentiali}'^  mischievous 
in  its  tendencies. 

4.  That  no  consideration  of  private  gain  or  public  revenue  can 
justify  the  upholding  of  a system  so  utterly  wrong  in  principle, 
suicidal  in  policy,  and  disastrous  in  results  as  the  traffic  in  in- 
toxicating liquors. 

5.  That  the  legislative  prohibition  of  the  liquor-traffic  is  per- 
fectly compatible  with  rational  liberty  and  with  all  the  claims  of 
justice  and  ligitimate  commerce. 

6.  That  the  legislative  suppression  of  the  liquor-traffic  would 
bs  highly  conducive  to  the  de’.-elopment  of  a progressive 
civilization. 

7.  That  rising  above  class,  sectarian,  or  party  considerations,  all 
good  citizens  should  combine  to  procure  an  enactment  pro- 
hibiting the  sale  of  intoxicating  beverages,  as  affording  most 
efficient  aid  in  removing  the  appalling  evil  of  intemperance. 


SUPPRESSION 


OF  THE 


LIQUOR  TRAFFIC. 


BY  EEV.  H.  D.  KrrCUEL. 


TX  the  progress  of  every  great  Reform  there  are  successive 
I-  stages,  marked  by  new  aspects  of  the  work,  and  demand- 
ing from  time  to  time  new  aims  and  measures.  We  com- 
mence tlie  work  experimentally.  We  know  not  where  the 
strength  of  the  enemy  lies.  Point  after  point  of  greater  ap- 
parent vitality  is  assailed  and  carried,  and  yet  the  strength 
of  the  evil  is  not  bi-oken.  Gradually  we  come  to  know  where 
the  heart  of  the  mischief  is  to  be  found.  That  heart  itself  is 
not  stationai-y.  There  is  in  every  great  social  wrong  a shift- 
ing vitality,  which  retreats  as  It  is  assailed,  and  is  found  at 
last  in  what,  perhaps,  was  once  no  vital  point.  Aiming  evei  at 
this,  we  must  change  as  it  changes,  and  strike  at  the  life  of 
the  evil  wherever  intrenched. 

Meantime  we  are  ourselves  in  a process  of  development. 
Our  work  educates  us.  Each  stage  prepares  us  for  the  next. 
The  volume  of  reformed  and  reformino-  sentiment  is  au"- 

CD  O 

merited,  and  gathers  vigor  as  it  advances.  Thus  we  come  to 
each  more  desperate  struggle  trained  to  the  requisite  wisdom 
and  strength.  Rot  an  effort  has  been  fruitless — not  a delay, 
nor  a reverse,  nor  an  apparent  failure  has  Ireen  without  its 
use.  We  do  not  find  the  last  citadel  of  the  foe  until  tho 
boarch  has  prepared  us  for  victory. 

This  has  been  eminently  true  in  the  Temperance  Refcrm*- 
tion.  Increasing  wisdom  and  strength  have  marked  its  sufi- 
cessivc  stages.  As  we  have  pursued  the  enemy  from  one 
stronghold  to  another,  we  have  been  disciplined  for  future 
efforts.  Gradually  we  have  learned  the  nature  and  methods 


2 


SUPPRESSION  OF  THE  LIQUOR  TRAFFIC. 


of  Intemperance,  and  have  been  led  onward  into  new  fields 
of  more  decisive  effort,  to  new  positions  commanding  more 
vital  points. 

It  has  been  of  necessity  a slow  and  toilsome  enterpT-ise.  Xo 
such  reform,  involving  in  its  success  a revolution  of  popular 
sentiment  and  practice,  can  be  rapid  in  its  advances.  Intem- 
perance was  a broad  and  many-sided  evil.  It  had  long  and 
universally  prevailed,  till  it  had  shaped  all  things  into  conform- 
ity with  itself.  Its  attitude  was  tliat  of  an  Institution,  i-est- 
ing  its  proud  structure  on  the  pillars  of  Appetite  and  Preju- 
dice, Interest  and  Law.  It  had  grown  to  be  a giant  system 
of  sin,  more  compact,  more  firmly  intrenched,  and  capable  of 
sterner  resistance  to  every  form  of  assault  than  any  other. 
It  stood  defiant  on  the  field,  triumphant  over  the  dictates  of 
religion,  the  instincts  of  humanity,  the  promptings  of  selfi 
interest.  Xow  a system  which  could  thus  despotize  over  the 
strongest  pu'inciples  of  human  action  could  not  be  expected 
to  yield  to  ordinary  opposition.  It  has,  indeed,  resisted  as  no 
other  species  of  wickedness  ever  did.  The  Adversary  is  not 
wont  to  yield  such  fields  unfought.  He  has  defended,  and 
will  yet  defend,  this  favorite  system  with  an  unscrupulous  and 
persevering  energy,  which  could  scarce  be  exceeded  if  this 
were  the  last  citadel  of  sin,  and  the  very  kingdom  of  dark- 
ness were  tottering  in  the  struggle. 

And  yet  we  are  far  from  having  labored  in  vain.  "SVith 
any  just  conception  of  the  nature  of  the  work,  the  progress 
must  be  pronounced  great  indeed.  But  in  order  to  any  just 
estimate  of  the  success  which  has  crowned  our  past  exertions, 
in  order  to  appreciate  aright  our  rate  of  progress  in  this  en 
terprise,  we  need  a distinct  apprehension  of  the  real  scope  and 
aim  of  the  Temperance  Keformation.  A broad  view  of  oul 
work  in  the  fullness  of  its  design  will  cure  our  impatience, 
and  throw  light  on  our  slow  and  toilsome  progress. 

What  is  Our  Enterprise  ? 

The  great  object  of  the  Temperance  Reformation  is  to  edu- 
cate on  this  point  the  moral  sense  of  the  whole  population, 
BO  that  as  speedily  as  possible  Intemperance,  with  all  that 
produces  and  sustains  it  shall  be  regarded  and  treated  as  a 


SUPPRESSION  OF  THE  LIQUOR  TRAFFIOt 


cnme.  This,  from  the  beginning,  has  been  the  real  import  oT 
our  work.  And  through  all  the  apparent  defeats  and  tem- 
porary reverses  which  we  have  witnessed,  this  design  has 
been  steadily  advancing  toward  a happy  issue.  We  have 
undertaken,  in  this  Reformation,  to  renovate  the  entire  social 
body — to  eradicate  the  strange  prejudices  and  customs  which 
have  come  down  to  us  from  the  old  Days  of  Drink — to  en- 
lighten and  purify  and  elevate  all  classes  of  men — in  a word, 
to  re-educate  society  and  carry  it  over  bodily  to  rational  views 
and  right  practice. 

Look  now  at  two  pictures  of  society.  In  the  one,  we  see 
the  Avhole  community  utterly  blind  and  stupid  under  the  do- 
minion of  Intemperance.  There  is  little  sense  of  the  evil,  and 
no  conscience  touching  it.  All  drink — shame  and  misery 
abound — vice  reigns — a horrid  desolation  is  spreading;  but  a 
strange  blindness  is  over  all.  The  cause  and  the  remedy  of 
all  this  are  uuthought  of.  To  drink  and  provide  drink — to 
sell  and  to  use — these  are  among  the  chief  ends  of  life,  things 
necessary,  ivith  no  character  of  morality  about  them.  Society 
IS  steeped  in  strong  drink.  Born,  living,  dying,  no  man  can 
do  without  it.  Such  a state  of  things  is  possible — it  has  been 
• — and  not  many  years  ago  it  existed  among  us.  It  was  in 
this  condition  of  things  the  ivork  of  Reformation  began. 

And  now  contemplate  the  other  picture.  It  presents  a 
community  in  Avhich,  instead  of  a strange  prejudice  in  favor 
of  intoxicating  drinks,  there  is  a natural  and  intelligent  dread 
of  them — in  which  from  their  well-known  properties,  from 
their  operation  on  the  human  systeii^  and  on  all  human  inter- 
ests, the  use  of  them  by  any  man  as  a beverage  is  looked 
upon  as  an  act  of  wanton  trifling  with  his  own  well-being  and 
that  of  all  around  him.  For  a man  to  put  himself  into  a state 
of  intoxication,  or  make  any  voluntary  approach  toward  tiia 
state,  is  regarded  as  a mad  and  criminal  act.  All  see  it  as  it 
is — a voamtary  abandonment  of  his  own  rational  and  moral' 
being  ; an  expulsion  of  judgment,  conscience,  and  self-control ; 
and  a surrender  of  himself,  for  the  time,  into  the  possession 
of  a demm,  to  be  used  by  him  as  he  will.  All  see  and  feel 
that  no  human  beiim  has  the  I’isht  thus  to  turn  himself  loose 
and  infuriated  among  his  fellows,  the  ready  agent  for  every 


4 


SUPPEESSIOK  OF  THE  LIQUOR  TRAFFIC. 


•fihameful  and  infamous  deed.  And  with  equal  clearness  all 
see  that  for  another  to  aid  and  abet  such  an  act,  and  even 
tempt  men  to  its  commissioa  by  furnishing  for  gain  the  means 
of  such  derangement,  is  5,11  intolerable  wrong  to  the  whole 
community.  That  a man  siiould  make  it  his  business  to  sell 
what  tends  directly  to  madden  and  destroy  his  fellows,  and 
expose  every  right  aftection  and  interest  of  others — that  he 
should  live  by  making  rutliless  havoc  all  around  htm — all  look 
upon  such  an  act  as  one  of  superlative  guilt.  In  this  condi- 
tion of  society,  voluntary  inebriation  is  treated  as  a cnme ; 
and  he  who  furnishes  the  means  of  intoxication  is 
deemed  guilty  of  a still  higher  crime.  They  have  laws  to  that 
end,  as  clearly  seen  to  be  necessary  and  just,  and  enforced 
with  as  ready  and  unanimous  approval,  as  our  statutes  now 
are  against  the  thief  or  the  burglar. 

Alcohol  takes  its  place  among  the  useful  but  dangerous 
drugs,  to  be  treated  as  other  poisons  are.  Drink  it ! The 
man  Avho  does  drink  it  is  a man  to  be  tivken  care  of — and  he 
who  should  so  trifle  with  the  public  security  and  peace  as  to 
give  or  sell  it  for  a drink,  and  should  talk  of  getting  his  liv- 
ing in  that  wajq  he  would  have  a living  provided  for  him, 
more  honest  and  honorable,  in  the  State  Prison. 

Now,  from  these  two  conditions  of  society,  drawn  only  in 
outline,  we  may  learn  the  nature  of  our  enterprise.  Our  work 
is  to  cany  over  the  entire  body  of  the  people  from  the  one 
of  these  to  the  other.  We  have  found  it  no  brief  and  easy 
work.  Patience  must  have  large  part  iu  it.  The  object 
being  a great  popular  moral  change,  every  principle  must  be 
tried,  the  expeiiment  at  every  step  must  be  tested.  Positiona 
which  were  long  since  taken  by  those  advanced  in  the  work, 
are  thrown  back  to  be  sifted  by  the  people  till  they  work 
themselves  ont  cleany  among  the  mass  of  the  community. 
’The  aim  is  not  to  see  how  speedily  a few,  or  even  a large 
part  of  men,  can  perfect  this  reform  in  their  own  views  and 
practice,  but  how  soon  the  rvhole  body  can  be  molded  over. 
Therefore  we  go  slowly.  No  such  work  can  be  done  swiftly. 

And  yet  let  no  man  grow  faint  in  heart  or  hand.  This  great 
revolution  will  surely  be  accomplished.  From  the  day  of  the 
first  eifort,  all  along  through  these  many  years  of  argument 


SUPPBESSION  OF  THE  LIQUOB  TBAFFIC. 


6 


and  entreaty,  through  all  the  successes  and  the  reverses,  the 
bright  days  and  the  dark,  the  great  purpose  has  been  steadily 
progressing.  And,  considered  aright,  the  progress  has  by  no 
means  been  slow.  The  first  generation  has  not  yet  passed 
away  since  this  reform  was  vigorously  begun.  Many  who 
were  in  the  first  onset  still  live  to  render  it  efficient  service, 
and  to  cheer  us  in  the  struggle.  Yet  in  this  one  genei’ation 
^Lat  changes  have  been  witnessed!  And  what  elemcnta 
have  been  j^repared,  assuring  us  of  more  blessed  changes  yet 
in  the  futui'e ! They  who  can  best  remember  the  times  of 
darkness  and  drink,  thirty  years  ago,  will  most  readily  concur 
in  the  belief  that  the  work  is  more  than  half  accomplished— 
that  the  widest  and  by  fixr  the  most  difficult  part  of  the  pas- 
sage, through  which  the  social  bodyjs  moving  in  its  ti’ansition 
from  that  fii’st  to  the  second  condition,  just  desci’ibed,  ia 
already  passed  over’.  Much  labor  still  awaits  us ; yet  so  far 
from  yielding  to  discouragement,  a strong  and  happy  confi- 
dence should  fill  our  hearts.  No  changes  remain  so  great, 
so  difficult,  as  those  which  have  already  been  achieved.  Wo 
have  carried  this  Refoiination  to  the  point  where  no  power 
can  turn  it  back  or  place  it  under  permanent  check.  It  may 
be  cried  down  here  and  betrayed  there — it  may  still  have  it* 
local  and  temporary  reverses ; but  as  a xvhole,  the  great  pur 
pose  is  advancing.  The  strong  tide  sets  onward.  The  sur 
face  may  be  swept  hither  or  thither  by  the  breeze,  but  the 
under  current  holds  broadly  and  deeply  on  its  coursq,  and 
presses  onwai'd  with  a steady  and  resistless  force.  Insensibly 
the  whole  body  of  society  has  changed  and  is  changing.  The 
leaven  is  working  in  all.  Light  has  been  poured  abroad,  till, 
willing  or  unwilling,  the  people  understand  this  matter.  Men 
know  the  nature  and  tendency  of  these  drinks.  We  have 
enlisted  the  mass  of  the  virtuous  and  influential.  We  have 
nearly  the  whole  of  the  quite  young.  Even  those  who  resist 
us  are  themselves  changed.  Many  denounce  and  ridicule  this 
reform  with  breath  xvhich  it  has  saved  for  them.  Let  us  have 
patience — a steadfast,  hopeful,  patient  activity.  The  change 
IS  working  slowly  that  it  may  be  deep  and  sure.  It  has  gone 
forward,  and  is  still  proceeding,  as  rapidly  as  so  great  a body 
cau  be  moved  in  a moral  change. 


3 


SUPPhreSSION  OF  THE  LIQUOE  TRAFFIC. 


The  Present  Position  of  the  Enterprise. 

And  now,  where  is  our  position?  What  point  have  wo 
reached  in  the  progress  of  this  reform  ? Society  is  yet  in 
transition,  slowly  hut  surely  passing  over  to  the  condition  of 
freedom  from  the  dominion  of  drink.  Step  by  step  it  has 
already  gone  through  a revolution  of  opinion  and  practice  it 
respect  to  the  use  of  inebriating  drinks,  almost  surpassing  lie- 
liefi  Our  success  has  transcended  the  anticipations  of  the 
most  sanguine.  What  stage  in  the  process  have  we  now 
reached  ? And  at  what  point  is  effort  now  demanded?  Tlie 
t’^ue  answer  to  this  question  should  be  earnestly  sought  by  all 
who  desire  the  consummation  of  this  great  work.  And  it 
will  be  found  from  a careful  consideration  of  the  present  po- 
sition of  the  Temperance  Enterprise. 

Looking  back  over  the  whole  course  of  this  reformation,  we 
find  a number  of  peiiods  at  which  the  work  had  become 
almost  stationary.  For  a time  no  visible  and  decisive  tokens 
of  progress  were  discoverable.  Such  a pei'iod  of  comparative 
inefficiency  occurred  during  the  transition  from  the  old  to 
the  new  pledge;  and  such  another  just  previous  to  the  Wash- 
ingtonian movement.  At  each  of  these  points  the  reform  had 
run  through  an  appointed  stage  and  readied  a crisis.  A new 
direction  of  our  energies  was  indicated ; a higher  field  cf 
effort  was  to  be  entered  upon,  and  more  decisive  conflicts  an  1 
more  signal  triumjths  were  the  result. 

For  a few  jmars  past  we  have  witnessed  another  such  season 
of  apparently  susj.-ended  progress.  The  rich  veins  which  we 
have  been  wmrking,  and  which  in  their  season  furnished  ua 
ample  employment  and  large  results,  are  no  longer  adequate 
to  our  full  strength.  We  are  ripe  for  more  decisive  Avork. 
And  such  work,  Ave  may  be  confident,  aAvaits  us.  To  reclaim 
the  fallen  can  no  longer  be  the  one  great  aim  of  our  eflbrts. 
The  day  has  gone  by  AA’hen  Ave  could  spend  our  Avhole  strength 
on  the  circulation  of  the  pledge.  Least  of  all  Avill  it  meet  the 
wants  of  the  time  to  busy  ourselves  mainly  in  shaping  ovei 
the  reformed  material  into  ncAv  and  eurions  organizations. 
We  have  yet  much  to  do  Avith  the  pledge,  and  much  to  do 
foi  the  salvation  of  the  fidlen,  and  organization  is  yet  a matter 
of  liO  small  moiucnt ; but  we  can  not  i’est  in  these  without  a 


STTPPEESSION  OF  THE  LIQUOR  TRAFFIC. 


7 


certainty  of  decline.  Our  safety  lies  in  a vigorous  onward 
movement.  ' We  must  advance,  or  it  will  be  difficult  long  to 
hold  the  ground  we  have  won.  A change  of  aims  and  meas- 
ures is  now  again  demanded.  There  is  some  new  field  for  ua 
to  enter,  richer  in  work  and  in  victories  than  any  we  have  yet 
occupied. 

And  what  shall  this  movement  be  ? It  is  clearly  indicated 
by  the  exigencies  of  the  work.  Everywhere  our  exertions  are 
met  and  repelled  by  one  form  of  resistance.  The  force  of 
opposition  which  now  meets  us  comes  of  the  Legalized  Traffic 
in  intoxicating  drinks.  It  is  this  which  now  checks  our  pro- 
gress, and  rolls  back  our  work  on  us  at  every  point.  This 
free,  universal,  law-defended  trade  in  drinks  is  proving  itself 
strong  enough  to  hold  us  at  bay ; and  with  all  our  moral 
agencies  a^one  arrayed  against  it,  it  bids  fair  to  give  us  vic- 
tories to  win  to  the  end  of  time.  The  matter  continuing  as  it 
is.  Moral  Suasion  alone  on  the  one  hand,  and  the  Legalized 
Traffic  in  full  blast  on  the  other,  our  highest  hope  can  be 
merely  to  hold  Intemperance  under  check  and  limits,  with 
only  the  distant  prosj^ect  of  bringing  it  to  an  end. 

I'm-  some  years  past  this  has  been  just  the  condition  of  this 
enterprise.  Everywhere  among  us,  at  all.  eligible  points,  the 
legally  commissioned  agents  of  Intemperance  have  jjlied  their 
V'ork.  They  act  as  public  functionaries.  They  spread  forth 
everywhere,  in  full  array,  the  means  of  intemperate  indul- 
gence. All  over  the  laud,  by  myriads,  at  every  moment  and 
with  every  advantage,  such  agencies  are  systematically  and 
diligently  at  work  to  entice  and  corrupt — recruiting  the 
wasted  ranks  of  the  fallen,  and  sustaining  with  terrible  effi- 
ciency the  whole  baleful  system  of  destruction.  On  the  other 
hand,  we  print  and  preav'h,  pray  and  persuade.  We  agitate, 
and  organize,  and  Washingtonianize.  And  we  stand  amazed 
that  the  work  does  not  go  forward  in. triumph.  What  we  gain 
is  evermore  slipping  from  us,  and  comes  rolling  back  on  our 
bands.  Fresh  victims  continually  appear.  We  save  many, 
and  lose  many.  The  truth  has  been  too  well  demonstrated 
that,  while  sustained  and  sanctioned  as  it  has  been,  the  Traffic 
is  not  far  from  a match  fbr  all  our  moral  suasives  combined.  Na 
art  could  devise  a better  scheme  for  perpetuating  the  conflict. 


i 


SUPPRESSION  OF  THE  LIQUOR  TRAFFIC. 


I;et  this  condition  of  oiir  work  be  carefully  considered,  for 
it  points  unerringdy  to  the  next  great  step  in  tins  reform.  Wa 
have  for  years  lieen  skirmishing,  over  and  over  the  held,  wia- 
ning  much,  and  finding  mud)  still  to  be  won — victorious  over 
an  ever  revi\  ing  and  still  to  be  vanquished  enemy.  All  our 
exeitions  have  only  sufficed  to  limit  and  moderate  the  evil. 
^Ve  hush  the  wail  in  one  sorrow-stricken  circle,  but  it  breaks 
foith  afresh  in  others.  We  do  much  to  mitig.ate  and  repair, 
much  in  the  way  of  indirect  prevention ; but  the  grand  Law 
of  Supply,  the  force  by  wnich  the  mischief  continually  reno- 
vates and  reproduces  itself,  that  force  remains  unbroken. 
And  until  that  self-perpetu.ating  power  is  bre  ken,  this  Reform- 
ation must  still  lingei’  on  its  way. 

This  vital  powei-  of  Intemperance  now  lies  in  the  Traffic,  by 
which  it  assumes  and  maintains  the  attitude  of  an  Institution. 
It  has  its  system,  and  talks  loudly  of  its  interests  and  rights. 
It  sustains  a scheme  of  vigorous  and  almost  universal  opera- 
tion. Its  dram-shops  line  our  thorough fai-es,  and  float  on  all 
our  watei's.  Eveiy  point  of  concourse  is  seized  and  occupied 
by  its  agents.  The  Tavern  is  perverted  fi'om  the  Traveler's 
llome^nto  a den  of  tipplers,  and  fitted  out  in  the  name  of  the 
State  with  all  that  can  entice  the  temperate  and  push  on  the 
falling  to  their  ruin.  While  this  continues,  we  may  bail  away 
fm'ever  at  the  pool  of  Intemperance,  but  this  system  will  pour 
in  ffiosh  Hoods  incessantly  upon  us.  Let  this  horild  enginery 
]jlay  on,  and  we  shall  forevei’  have  woe  to  alleviate,  pauperism 
to  pi'ovide  for,  crimes  to  punish,  and  victims  to  pull  from  the 
bin  ning  gulf.  Let  us  be  weary  of  working  so.  We  have 
rolled  this  stone  of  Sisyphus  till  patience  has  ceased  to  be  a 
viilue. 

The  Present  Demands  of  the  Work. 

The  effoi't  now  on  all  hands  clearly  indicated^ for  the  ad 
\ ;ince)nent  of  this  cause  is  a vigorous  and  united  onset  upon 
the  Ti’affic.  Let  us.  suppress  this  systematic  agency  for  tho 
temptation  and  I'uin  of  men.  While  sparing  this,  we  .allow  in 
the  field  an  enemy  capable  of  coinitei’woi'king  all  our  moral 
measui-es.  With  absolute  certainty,  while  it  continues,  this 
Traffic  will  steiiily  .and  powerfully  resist  us  at  every  point, 
U ia  the  only  edective  mode  of  opposition  with  wl*ich  w« 


SUPPRESSION  OF  THE  LIQUOR  TRAFFIC. 


b 

have  now  to  contend,  the  only  form  of  the  foe  which  we  have 
no  weapons  to  reach.  We  have  ran  upon  an  obstacle  which 
no  zeal  nor  amount  of  exertion,  in  the  old  way,  can  ever  sur- 
mount. Our  moral  means  have  no  relevancy  to  this  part  of 
Jie  work.  The  enemy  is  now  intrenched  in  a fortress  as  im 
pregnable  as  rock  to  all  mere  influence  and  argumentation. 
Bhielded  behind  the  ramparts  of  Law  and  Customs,  the  Traffic 
is  proof  against  all  those  weapons  which  we  have  found 
effectual  in  other  directions.  It  laughs  at  the  shaking  of  our 
moral  spear.  The  whole  artillery  of  moral  suasion  glances 
from  it  as  a powerless  impertinence,  harmless  as  the  pattering 
of  hail  on  a rock.  The  strong  arm  of  Law  alone  can  reach  it. 
And  this  is  the  point  which  we  have  reached  in  die  process 
of  this  reform.  Our  business  now  is  with  the  Traffic.  To 
this  we  are  summoned  now  as  our  first  duty.  We  must  stop 
this  authorized  trade  in  destructive  drinks. 

This  has  indeed  begun  to  be  felt.  For  some  time  past  we 
have  turned,  as  by  one  consent,  to  the  consideration  of  Legal 
Restraints.  By  a common  impulse,  in  this  State  and  in  sev- 
eral others,  the  public  mind  has  raised  the  inquiry.  Shall  ive 
any  longer  afford  the  protection  of  Law  to  a business  directly 
and  visibly  at  war  with  all  peace  and  virtue  and  eveiy  inter- 
est of  society  ? Shall  we  not  now  begin  to  deal  with  tiffs 
traffic  as  it  deserves  to  be  dealt  with,  as  a high  civil  as  well 
as  moral  offense  ? Criminal  as  it  is  before  Divine  Law,  shall 
it  any  longer  be  suffered  to  shelter  itself  under  human  legisla- 
tion ? This  is  no  question  for  remote  speculation — it  is  the 
question  of  the  day,  of  most  urgent,  immediate,  practical  in- 
terest. Already  whatever  of  genuine  temperance  principle 
there  is  among  us  has  felt  itself  moved  in  this  direction.  And 
we  must  go  on  to  array  ourselves  more  and  more  against  the 
Ti'affic,  or  ffrll  back  from  the  work  and  be  wanting  in  the 
tery  crisis  of  the  conflict. 

At  the  same  time  let  it  be  kept  in  view  that  this  special  and 
etrenuous  movement  against  the  Traffic  implies  no  abandoiv 
ment  of  other  long-tried  and  approved  methods  of  advancing 
this  cause.  We  do  not  look  to  legislation  as  a substitute  for 
moral  means.  Let  us  beware  of  the  fatal  notion  that  eveii 
best  possible  Law  would  perfect  this  reform  without 


10 


BTJPPEESSION  OF  THE  LIQUOE  TEAFFIO. 


action  on  our  part.  We  must  not  contemplate  it  as  coming 
instead  of  our  ordinary  system  of  operation,  or  as  designed  to 
render  any  moral  instrumentality  less  needful  and  pertinent 
in  its  place.  All  that  we  want  of  Law,  all  that  the  best 
enactments  can  do  for  us,  is  simply  to  clear  the  path  for  the 
legitimate  and  unimpeded  operation  of  moral  means.  W e d(siro 
It  simply  to  remove  •impediments  of  a nature  too  gi’oss  to  feel 
persuasion  or  derive  conviction  from  anything  short  of  a 
statute.  For  a length  of  time,  moreover,  prohibitory  Law  in 
this  matter  must  rest  back  on  a vigorous  prosecution  of  argu- 
ment and  influence  among  the  people ; and  if  these  be  relaxed, 
Law  itself  will  be  speedily  swept  away  by  the  refluent  tide 
of  Intemperance. 

So  flxr,  then,  from  being  at  liberty  to  relax  our  present 
efforts,  while  we  array  the  whole  Temperance  sentiment 
against  the  Traffic,  we  do  but  enlarge  the  field  of  action.  The 
old  fephere  remains,  and  a new  is  opened.  To  our  work,  the 
great  work  after  all,  of  winning  to  the  side  of  virtue  all  who 
have  conscience  and  heart,  we  do  but  add  the  task  of  legally 
restraining  those  wdio  have  neither.  Our  double  duty  will 
call  for  redoubled  exertion.  Let  us  ply  witli  fresh  zeal  the 
whole  system  of  argument,  persuasion,  personal  influence,  and 
legal  restriction.  They  are  the  parts  of  an  entire  scheme  of 
action.  Let  our  onset  be  simultaneous  on  both  wings  of  the 
foe,  bringing  Law  to  bear  on  the  Traffic,  and  Moral  Suasion 
on  the  Vice — Restriction  for  the  vender  and  Persuasion  for 
his  victims. 

Who  is  Responsible  for  the  Continuance  of  the  Traffic  ? 

Not  those  alone  who  cordially  desire  and  directly  sustain 
it.  The  responsibility  rests  also  on  those  who  detest  it  and 
desire  its  overthrow,  from  the  moment  it  comes  into  their 
power  to  destroy  it  by  any  legitimate  means,  by  any  measure 
of  exertion  not  transcending  the  demands  of  the  case.  So 
Boon  and  so  far  as  the  friends  of  Temperance  gain'the  power 
to  wrest  perverted  Law  from  the  gi’asp  of  Intemperance  and 
turn  it  on  the  foe,  they  are  bound  to  do  it.  Neglecting  this, 
they  too  are  chargeable  with  the  continued  Traffic. 

Restrictive  legislation  against  this  pernicious  business  hag 


SUPPRESSION  OF  THE  LIQUOR  TRAFFIC. 


li 

long  since,  as  we  shall  presently  see,  received  abundant  war« 
rant.  Our  duty  lies  in  the  same  direction.  It  is  to  urge  tor- 
ward  the  plan  of  Proliibition,  long  ago  sanctioned  and  very 
partiahy  applied,  just  as  fast  and  far  as  possible — to  follow 
closely  up  every  ineasui'e  of  change  in  the  public  sentiment 
with  new  measures  of  Prohibition,  and  embody  every  degree 
of  reformed  opinion  in  new  legal  restrictions.  If  at  any  time 
the  Traffic  is  so  deeply  intrenched  in  the  popular  infatuation 
that  it  can  not  be  wholly  put  down,  let  the  Law  stand  at  the 
’fltmost  practicable  advance,  yielding  the  least  that  it  may, 
and  that  only  to  necessity.  We  are  bound  to  carry  our  re- 
straints continually  up  to  the  point  where  the  popular  delusion 
meets  us  with  superior  force  and  compels  us  to  desist.  There 
is  but  one  position  we  can  innocently  occupy  in  relation  to 
this  Traffic,  that  of  uncompromising  hostility,  of  ceaseless,  ut- 
most opposition.  It  is  a baleful  and  God-forbidden  business, 
and  we  have  no  sanction,  no  permission,  nor  any  such  thing 
to  o'ive  it.  If  others  have  the  heart  and  the  strength  to  sus- 
tain it,  we  must  endure  it — but  only  because  we  must,  and 
only  while  we  must  ; instantly  as  it  becomes  possible  for  us, 
we  will  push  new  and  stringent  restrictions  up,  fully  up,  to 
our  power,  and  prohibit  it  wholly  the  moment  we  are  able. 
Only  as  we  hold  this  position  are  we  guiltless  of  the  Traffic. 

While  we  hold  any  other  relation  to-it  than  this,  what  con 
sistency,  what  rational  and  dignified  purpose  is  there  in  oui 
temperance  activities  ? If  we  mean  to  conquer  and  not  merely 
to  fight,  it  is  time  that  our  scheme  of  operation  included  an 
earnest  and  resolute  movement  against  the  Traffic.  To  rectify 
the  public  sentiment  by  moral  means  is  but  nart  of  our  work. 
i\nd  even  what  Ave  effect  in  that  ivay  will  be  insecure  and 
perpetually  sliding  back  on  us,  till  we  learn  to  clinch  every 
degi'ee  of  reform  by  a corresponding  advance  in  the  system 
cf  Legal  Prohibition. 

For  a long  time  after  the  commencement  of  the  Temperance 
reform,  its  friends  were  shut  up  almost  wholly  to  the  use  of 
moral  means  for  its  promotion.  They  could  only  reason,  per. 
suade,  and  I'emonstrate.  The  popular  prejudice  and  appetite 
demanded  an  almost  unrestricted  liberty  in  the  vending  of 
drinks.  They  wisely  forbore  to  press  for  legislation  while 


12 


BDPPEESSIO^ST  OF  THE  LIQUOR  TEAFITC. 


every  such  effort  was  certain  to  be  defeated,  and  likely  even 
to  exasperate  the  evil.  But  the  times  are  changed.  Cust.un 
and  commou  sentiment  have  been  so  far  rectified  in  several 
of  our  States,  that  the  strength  of  society,  the  moral  and  the 
numerical  strength,  may  Avith  due  exertion  be  relied  on  to 
sustain  a decisive  movement  against  this  sorest  of  all  our 
S(jcial  evils.  Wliy  are  we  so  slow  then  to  arra}^  ourselves  fully 
against  this  Traffic?  Why  do  Ave  labor  on,  year  after  year, 
sustaining  hy  our  forbear  anas  a system  directly  counteract- 
ing all  our  effoi'ts?  It  is  in  the  power  of  those  Avho  numbei 
themselves  among  the  friends  of  this  work,  by  adequate  and 
sustained  effort  in  this  direction,  to  restrict,  almost  as  far  as 
tliey  please,  the  traffic  in  intoxicating  drinks.  Instead  ol 
sucli  utmost  possible  restriction,  it  riots  in  gratuitous  license. 
Our  legal  permissions  equal  its  largest  desires.  Thus  by  om 
liberal  alloAAmnce  of  the  . traffic,  Ave  feed  Avith  one  hand  th«, 
fires  Ave  are  striving  to  quench  with  the  other.  We  create, 
by  our  permitted  system  of  operations,  the  appetites  ana 
misery,  and  povertv’’  and  Avickedness  Avhich  by  another  scheme 
of  effoi'ts  we  labor  to  correct.  As  citizens  Ave  permit  the 
Ti'afHc ; by  our  forbearance  the  fata!  enginery  of  corruption 
and  ruin  is  still  briskly  at  work;  the  cup  is  everywhere 
proffered  to  men’s  lips  Avith  all  the  sanction  of  public  author- 
ity ; this  we  permit,  and  then  as  Friends  of  Temperance  we 
turn  and  bewail  the  legitimate  and  inevitable  fruit  of  our 
doings — the  Avoe,  and  beggary,  and  crime  that  floAV  from 
causes  operating  by  our  jAermissdon ! While  the  matter 
continues  thus,  let  us  knoAv  that  this  Avar  is  all  our  own— • 
both  sides  of  it.  When  Avill  the  “Friends  of  Temperance” 
quit  this  Traffic  ? When  will  this  guilty  connivance  be  Avitle 
draAvn  ? 

It  is  beyond  question,  AAm  think,  that  Avere  the  Avhole  Aveigbt 
of  the  Temperance  sentiment,  in  this  State  and  several  others, 
throAvn  undividedly  and  without  reserve  into  any  legitimate 
form  of  opposition  to  the  Traffic,  it  could  not  Avithstand  the 
shock.  We  are  able  to  carry  Avhatever  point  we  Avill  within 
the  limits  of  a Avise  discretion.  In  large  sections  of  country 
the  numerical  strength  is  clearly  Avith  us,  declared  to  be  so  on 
every  issue  that  has  been  made  for  years.  And  when  wa 


STJPPBESSION  OF  THE  LIQUOE  TEAFFIC. 


la 

take  into  consideration  the  comparative  weight  and  worth 
and  prevalent  inflnential  power  of  character  and  position  as 
arrayed  on  tlie  two  sides  of  this  question,  there  is  not  room  for 
a doubt  that  a resolved  and  persevering  etfort,  made  with  an 
energy  and  devotion  such  as  the  merits  of  the  case  wouhl 
amply  justify,  would  triumph  over  every  obstacle,  and  lay  the 
gtern  interdict  oi  Law  on  this  business  of  death.  We  have 
faith  ir  the  people,  that  light,  and  reason,  and  conscience  wiH 
not  go  for  nothing.  Among  the  least  reformed,  convictions 
are  at  woi'k  that  Avill  not  leave  them  Avholly  against  us  when 
the  houi-  of  trial  comes.  We  bi'ing  to  the  struggle  the  advan- 
tage of  heai'ts  weakened  by  no  secret  misgivings  ot  our  cause 
■ — strong  in  the  sustaining  might  of  an  entire  conviction.  The 
good,  the  wise,  the  influential  are  not  equally  divided.  All 
the  elements  of  prevalence  are  on  one  side.  We  need  but 
united  counsels  and  singleness  of  heart. 

Our  position  then  is,  that  Ave  can  innocently  sustain  no 
other  relation  to  the  Traffic  in  intoxicating  drinks  than  that 
of  simple  and  strenuous  opp>osition — undermining  it,  on  the 
one  hand,  by  the  most  vigorous  scheme  of  moral  influences, 
and  cleaving  it  down,  on  the  other,  by  successive  prohibitory 
statutes,  approaching  as  rapidly  as  possible  the  point  of  entire, 
legal  proscription.  While  prejudice  and  appetite  and  cupidity 
can  prevail  to  keep  up  the  Traffic,  our  duty  is  to  hold  it 
strictly  down  to  the  minimum,  and  outlaw  it  as  speedily  as 
possible.  It  may  be  Avell  to  strengthen  this  position  by  shoAV 
ing  how  clearly  it  is  justified  by  the  merits  of  the  case. 

The  correctness  of  these  vieAvs  and  of  the  coui'se  indicated, 
depends  entirely  upon  the  estimate  that  is  to  be  put  on  the 
Traffic.  In  this  there  is  probably  very  little  agreement  among 
the  patrons  of  this  cause.  If  it  be,  as  Ave  regard  it,  the  gush- 
ing fountain  of  mischiefs  beyond  description,  if  here  lies' the 
gieat  strength  of  the  foe,  then  Avisdom  demands  that  out 
attention  and  efforts  be  mainly  and  immediately  directed  to 
this  point.  Let  us  then  contemplate  the  character  of  tlie 
Traffic  in  intoxicating  drinks,  and  specially  in  reference  to  this 
inquiry.  Is  it  such  to  admit  and  justify  the  application  of 
restrictive  Law  ? 


14 


SUPPRESSION  OF  THE  LIQUOR  TRAFFIC. 


The  Character  of  the  Traffic. 

It  is  the  systematic  business  of  maintaining  Intemperance, 
by  sating  the  appetites  already  formed,  and  kindling  them  in 
others  as  widely  as  possible.  It  is  purely  an  agency  for  evil, 
a fountain  of  unmiugled  bitterness.  And  with  all  this  iiicai 
culable  and  unredeemed  damage  to  human  well-being  the 
Traffic  stands  justly  chargeable. 

As  a foe  to  all  the  social  iutm'ests  of  men  there  is  no  other 
to  be  compared  with  this — no  other  that  wars  so  ruthlessly 
spoil  Home  and  all  that  sacred  circle  of  interests  of  which 
Home  is  the  center.  Back  of  all  the  visible  ravages  of  Intem- 
perance, and  deeper  than  all  these,  there  lies  a field  of  devas- 
tation which  has  never  been  full}"  explored,  and  can  never  be 
more  than  partially  reported.  It  is  the  wasted  realm  of  the 
social  afiections,  the  violated  sanctuary  of  domestic  peace. 
From  the  under  world  of  suppressed  wretchedness  there 
comes  up  to  the  ear  of  human  ^^ity  many  a piercing  cry  of 
those  Avho  writhe  under  the  slow  torments  of  a desolate  heart 
and  dying  hope.  Yet  all  this  which  meets  the  eye  and  jiaias 
the  ear  is  but  the  overflow  of  misery;  this  is  what  inadver- 
tently escapes  through  chasms  violently  rent  open  ; and  it 
tells  sadly  of  the  sea  of  anguish  that  is  stifled  forever  in  its 
secret  recesses. 

Within  this  sphere  of  social  devastation  the  curse  of  Drink 
has  a two-fold  oijeration — the  unseen  and  the  seen,  the  pro- 
cess and  the  result.  The  first  lies  in  that  vast  amount  of  uu- 
eold  and  unutterable  wretchedness  which  is  carefully  hidden, 
60  long  as  concealment  is  possible,  within  the  bosom  of  multi- 
tudes of  families  which  the  Destroyer  has  entered  and  marked 
for  his  own.  As  yet  his  victory  is  inconpilete.  His  victim 
has  not  yet  shaken  offiall  the  restraints  of  aflection,  nor  burnt 
through  the  barriers  of  reserve  and  shame.  He  yet  cleaves, 
with  a sensitiveness  that  is  very  signifidvant,  to  his  shattered 
Ecmnant  of  character.  And  others  within  that  smitten  home 
Ei'e  still  more  fondly  concealing  the  terrible  change.  Theirs 
is  a wretchedness  of  which  the  world  must  not  know,  for  it 
has  in  it  the  stain  of  shame.  The  keeifest  inflictions  are 'per- 
haps those  which  attend  the  incipient  stages  of  ruin.  Perhaps 
no  aftej’-pang  will  ever  distress  the  heart  like  that  which 


BtrPPUESSION  OF  THE  LIQUOR  TRAFFIC. 


15 


eomes  with  tae  first  conviction  that  the  love  of  drink  has 
gained  the  mastery  over  the  beloved  one.  And  from  tliat 
point  onward  through  all  the  unrecorded  history  of  a drunk- 
ard’s progress,  as  seen  and  felt  within  the  circle  of  those  who 
love  him,  there  is  a bitterness  of  anguish  which  can  be  fully 
conceived  only  by  those  Avho  have  tasted  the  cup  for  themselvea. 
To  those  without  that  circle  there  may  be  little  to  awake  sus. 
picion  of  the  torture  that  is  going  on  beneath  the  surface.  It 
is  not  till  the  heart  is  consumed  within  them,  not  till  despair 
has  grown  firmiliar,  and  the  whole  hidden  process  of  depriva- 
tion has  reached  its  maturity,  that  the  result  comes  forth  to 
the  surface  and  show''s  itself  to  the  eyes  of  men.  It  is  done  in 
silence  and  secrecy,  almost  before  we  dreamed  of  it. 

h'rom  this  ]ioint  the  work  is  open  and  appalling  indeed. 
Concealment  is  no  longer  sought,  for  it  is  felt  to  be  no  longer 
eitheT  possible  or  of  an}'^  avail.  The  fire  burned  long  repressed 
and  slowly  eating  away  every  support  within ; now  it  has 
burst  through  and  taken  air,  and  the  whole  pile  is  ready  to 
Cfdlapse  in  hopeless  conflagration — and  why  should  there  be 
any  further  attempt  at  concealment  ? 

And  now  look  at  the  visible  results  of  the  Traffic  on  all  the 
dearest  interests  of  mankind.  Look  at  its  handiwork  as 
written  out  in  woe  and  desolation  on  the  whole  face  of  society. 
Look  on  these  innumerable  hearts  that  have  long  silently  bled 
over  the  ruin  of  all  their  dearest  hojies,  till  they  can  bleed  in 
silence  no  more.  Myriads  of  such  still  sigh  among  the  living, 
and  many,  oh  ! how  many  myriads  have  hidden  their  crushed 
and  weary  hearts  in  the  grave  ! See  it  yearly  beggaring  mul- 
titudes of  families — quenching  the  light  of  many  thousand 
homes  in  anguish  and  despair.  Read  the  character  and  de- 
serts of  this  traflic  in  the  air  of  thriftlessness  and  dilapidatLon 
which  it  is  every  year  spreading  over  a countless  numbei’  of 
once  prosperous  and  hajrpy  homes — read  it  in  the  depravation 
of  character’,  the  growing  sottishness  of  its  victims,  fallen  fi’om 
the  sphere  of  hope  and  virtue  and  love,  and  pushed  r-apidly 
thi’ough  a cai’eer  of  shame  and  sin  toward  gi’aves  of  infamy. 
How  many  such,  with  those  that  love  them  still,  ai’e  even  now 
hiding  their  misery  in  obscui’e  and  comfortless  hovels  ! How 
these  sad  refuges  of  the  once  happy  and  hopeful  stare  upon 


16 


SUPPRESSION  OF  THE  LIQUOR  TRAFFIC. 


the  traveler  along  all  the  highways  and  byways  of  our  State  . 
How  they  thicken  within  the  broad  circuit  that  is  swept  by 
the  influence  of  some  den  of  drink ! Could  the  map  of  oul 
State  be  so  drawn  as  to  present  a full  picture  of  its  social  con- 
dition, and  reveal  to  us,  as  we  gazed  on  it,  all  tl  ese  drink- 
ruined  families,  strown  in  their  desolate  huts  over  all  its  sur- 
face— could  t be  made  transparent  also,  so  as  to  reveal  the 
burdens  of  grief  that  are  hidden  in  these  homes ; the  burst- 
ing hearts  of  parents  for  their  ruined  sons ; of  wives  from 
whose  life  all  joy  and  hope,  all  tenderness  and  comfort  have 
been  blotted  out  ; of  children  shame-crushed  and  doomed  to 
penury  and  disgrace — could  we  thus  look  on  all  these  stricken 
families,  once  affluent  and  respected,  now  doomed  to  mean- 
ness and  want,  each  with  its  own  peculiar  history  of  sorrow, 
we  should  ask  no  further  witness  to  the  heinous  guilt  of  the 
Traffic,  or  the  righteousness  of  Law  against  the  destroyer  of 
all  these ! 

We  may  well  pause  here  for  a moment  to  contemplate  the 
dii’ect  physical  inflictions  of  this  \ ice.  These  are  indeed  not 
the  worst,  but  how  great  are  even  these  least ! For  the  sake 
of  completeness  let  us  embrace  these  iu  our  view.  And 
among  these,  mark  the  first  blow  that  is  struck.  The  finger 
of  God  has  placed  this  significant  seal  of  his  disapproval  on 
the  intoxicating  agents  wliich  man’s  perverted  ingenuity  has 
devised : that  tlieir  use  shall  invariably  tend  to  engender  a 
burning  appetite  for  more ; that  he  who  indulges  in  them 
shall  do  it  at  the  peril  of  contracting  a passionate  and  rabid 
thirst  for  tliem,  which  shall  ultimately  overmaster  the  will  of 
its  victim,  and  drag  him  unresisting  to  his  ruin  ' Xo  mac 
can  put  himself  under  the  influence  of  alcoholic  stimulation 
without  incurring  the  risk  of  this  result.  . It  may  not  be  per- 
ceptible at  oik  e.  It  maybe  interrupted.  Whi.e  the  b.uidi 
are  yet  feeble,  he  may  escape.  But  let  the  hal  it  go  forward, 
the  excitemeii}  be  often  repeated,  and  soon  a deep-wrc uglit 
physical  eflect  Avill  be  produced ; a headlong  and  almost  de- 
lirious appetite,  of  the  nature  of  a physical  necessity,  will  have 
seized  the  whole  man  as  with  iron  arms,  and  crushed  fi'om 
his  heart  both  the  power  and  the  wish  of  self-con ti'ol.  The 
perpetually  recurring  thirst  must  be  quenched  with  a draught 


SUPPRESSION  OF  THE  LIQUOR  TRAFFIC. 


iJ 

which  only  adds  fuel  to  the  flame.  It  is  a physical  inflictio^i, 
Our  nature  and  these  articles  stand  so  related  to  each  oth>jS 
that  their  use  invariably  tends  to  this. 

The  melancholy  condition  of  drunkenness  is  another  of 
these.  It  is  seen  in  the  unnatural  excitement  of  body  and 
aiind  in  the  poor  inebriate — in  the  derangement  of  all  his 
powers,  some  of  his  laculties  palsied,  others  wrought  up  to  a 
pitch  of  action  bordering  on  delirium  ; the  moral  faculties, 
now  more  than  ever  needed  to  operate  with  special  power  to 
restrain,  are  enfeebled  and  at  length  obliterated,  and  the 
deranged  man,  with  his  brain  fli-ed  and  whirling  with  excite- 
ment, his  ijhysical  power  increased  as  yet,  and  all  moral  re- 
straints withdrawn,  is  rijie  for  any  act  which  wild  fancy,  or  a 
depraved  heart,  or  a ready  devil  may  suggest.  At  a stage 
farther  onward  the  curse  assumes  another,  and  in  some  re- 
spects a sadder  form.  The  stage  of  mad  excitation  has  passed 
into  that  of  stupefaction.  It  need  not  be  described.  The 
dark  picture  once  seen  never  fades  from  the  memory.  That 
condition  is  God’s  loud  warning,  uttered  through  our  abused 
oatui’e,  against  the  use  of  drink. 

Add  now  to  these  the  sacrifice  of  health  and  life.  There  is 
DO  disease,  no  liability  or  exposure  to  disease,  that  is  not  fos- 
tered and  aggravated  by  intemperance ; while  it  has  a list  of 
maladies  peculiar  to  itself,  and  of  the  most  fearful  character. 
Under  disguised  and  softened  names,  these  have  been,  and 
still  are,  covertly  at  work  as  the  choice  instrumentalities  of 
death ; and  the  lying  marble  over  myi-iads  of  grave  thus  filled 
glosses  with  soft  terras  the  truth  which  the  living  would  not 
know. 

Another  of  the  physical  effects  of  drunkenness  has  as  yet 
been  little  considered — we  mean  its  connection  with  Idiocy 
aa  its  prociucing  cause.  When  fully  ex])lored  this  field  will 
exhibit  results  more  appalling  than  we  have  conceived.  The 
reader  may  gain  some  intimation  of  the  more  general  fact  by 
looking  around  him  on  the  instances  of  partial  or  entire  mental 
mbecility  that  are  presented  within  the  circle  of  his  observa. 
tion.  Let  liim  carefully  trace  their  relations.  Are  these 
melancholy  spectacles  so  utterly  unaccountable,  so  dissevered 
from  all  traceable  causes,  as  they  are  generally  deemed  f 


18 


SUrPEESSION  OF  THE  LIQEOE  TEAEFIC. 


They  are  in  a very  large  proportion  the  offspring  of  drnnTccr 
parents!  Rigid  investigation,  we  are  confident,  whenever  it 
shall  be  made,  Avill  sho-w  that  at  least  four-ffths  of  these  help- 
less objects  are  ascribable  tc  intemperance,  the  living  monu- 
ments of  sin  and  shame  by  drink.  The  report  of  a Committee 
appointed  to  inquire  in  regard  to  the  Idiots  of  INIassachuseKs, 
showed  that  eleven-twelfths  of  this  pitiable  class  were  born  of 
intemperate  parents  ! Let  the  facts  be  ascertained,  and  results 
equally  astounding  will  be  brought  to  light  in  other  States, 
Another  crevice  is  thus  opened  through  which  we  catch 
glimpses  of  the  unutterable  and  revolting  scenes  of  brutality 
perpetrated  under  the  infenial  stimulation  of  drink,  and  only 
coming  to  light  in  these  their  unhappy  fruits. 

In  all  these  forms  the  God  of  our  nature  has  loaded  the 
Traffic  with  an  appalling  burden  of  bitter  and  terrible  results. 
There  is  not  another  form  of  unrighteousness  against  which 
we  have  a more  clear  and  emphatic  revelation  of  the  Divine 
displeasure  tlian  against  this,  as  seen  in  the  legitimate  con- 
sequences with  which  it  is  loaded.  These  constitute  the 
natiiral  revelation  of  the  Divine  AYill  against  this  Traffic.  All 
these  results  are  its  legitimate  and  well-known  fruits.  And 
the  business  of  furnishing  the  known  provocative  of  every 
species  of  evil  is  incomparably  more  guilty  than  the  use  of  it 
under  the  phreusy  of  appetite  or  the  demand  of  custom.  By 
these  inevitable  results  it  stands  branded  with  the  most  sig- 
nificant curse  of  the  God  of  Nature — a curse  ever  deepening 
from  the  first  cup  down  to  the  closing  scene  in  beggary  and 
infamy,  delirium  and  the  grave. 

But  we  have  as  yet  contemplated  only  the  least  serious  of 
its  results.  The  moral  influence  of  the  Traffic  is  still  more  de- 
plorable. Everywhere  it  is  the  prolific  parent  and  instigator 
of  all  that  is  unseemly  and  flagitious.  It  is  a central  vice,  a 
radiating  point  for  all  crime.  It  creates  an  aptitude  for  all 
iniquity.  It  is  the  favorite  and  most  successful  device  of  the 
great  Deceiver  to  steal  away  the  judgment,  stupefy  the  con. 
science,  and  remove  all  moral  susceptibilities  and  restraints, 
and  at  the  same  time  goad  up  every  passion  to  a pitch  of 
maddening  excitement  by  the  use  of  intoxicating  drinks 
Often  the  evil-minded  find  themselve®  incapable  of  the  crimes 


SUPPKE8SI0N  OP  THE  LIQUOR  TRAFFIC. 


19 


they  meditate,  till  qualified  hy  a degree  of  intoxication.  Then 
all  crime  is  easy.  An  instrument  is  then  made  ready  for 
Satan’s  using;  and  if  there  be  any  deed  the  drunken  man  does 
not  happen  to  pei-petrate,  it  is  not  that  he  is  not  prepared  fo? 
it.  The  helm  is  put  into  the  hands  of  the  fiend,  and  with 
canvas  all  spread,  driving  wildly  before  the  storm'  of  excited 
passion,  ho  guides  and  wrecks  the  soul  on  whatever  rock  of 
crime  he  will. 

The  guilt  of  the  inebriate  is  great.  In  our  reprobation  of 
the  Traffic  and  the  Dealer,  let  us  not  palliate  the  offense  of  him 
who  consents  to  stand  in  the  double  capacity  of  a criminal 
and  a victim.  But  the  most  candid  justice  must  pronounce 
that  he  has  no  guilt  to  match  with  his,  w'ho  furnishes  the 
draught  that  qualifies  him  for  any  crime.  Viewed  consider 
ately,  in  the  light  of  their  respective  motives,  the  drunkard 
will  pass  for  an  innocent  and  honorable  man  in  comparison 
with  the  retailer  of  drinks.  The  one  yields  under  the  impulse, 
it  may  be  even  the  torture  of  appetite ; the  other  is  a cool, 
mercenary  speculator,  thriving  on  the  frailties  and  vices  of 
others.  The  one  we  commiserate  while  we  blame;  the  other 
inspires’ us  with  indignant  abhorrence,  for  he  is  a trader  in 
tears  and  blood  and  crimes.  To  one  he  sells  a capacity  of 
brutal  abuse  to  his  family ; to  another  he  sells  theft,  or  lustful 
violence,  or  murder.  His  shop  is  a repository  Avhere  all  the 
immoralities  and  iniquities  are  kept  and  sold  on  commission 
from  the  pit.  There  the  incendiary  lights  his  torch,  and  the 
assassin  nurses  his  appetite  for  blood.  There  is  sold  by  the 
glass  that  modern  species  of  insanity  which  we  hear  pleaded 
in  every  instance  of  flagrant  crime.  It  is  simply  the  condition 
of  being  not  in  one’s  right  mind — sold  everywhere  among  na 
for  less  than  a handful  of  coppers. 

The  character  of  the  Traffic  as  an  agency  for  the  promotion 
of  vice  and  immorality  depends  evidently  to  a great  extent 
on  tlie  character  of  those  who  deal  in  drinks;  and  that  hag 
sunk  just  as  this  Reform  has  advanced.  It  has  become  a di» 
ci’editable  business,  felt  to  be  such,  even  by  those  engaged  in 
it.  It  has  been  constantly  falling  into  less  and  less  scrupulous 
bauds.  Hence  these  two  results  are  natural — that  our  moral 
masion  avails  less  with  dealers  than  with  drunkards — and  that 


so 


SUPPETTSoiOir  OF  THE  LIQPOE  TKAFFIC. 


an  almost  incredible  proportion  of  dealers  tbemselv’es  fall,  ia 
one  way  or  another,  into  the  pit  they  dig  for  otners.  In  their 
persons,  estates,  and  families  they  suffer  beyond  any  oilmr 
equal  class  of  men.  How  many  of  them  -wear  in  their  persona 
a badge  of  their  calling!  How  many  finhhed  landlords  I 
How  many  dealers  in  our  State  Prisons ! The  investigation 
vas  not  long  since  made  in  the  prison  of  a neighboring  State, 
and  gave  as  the  result  forty  out  of  one  hundred  and  seventy 
'-—nearly  one  in  four  ! 

But  aside  from  the  commission  of  crime  and  overt  iniquities, 
the  demoralizing  influence  of  the  Traflic  is  indefinitely  great 
and  defying  all  computation.  These  outrages,  now  and  then 
startling  us,  are  but  the  more  obvious  and  striking  results. 
Tliey  are  the  ripe  fruits — the  prominences  which  rise  to  view 
out  of  a wide  level  of  more  common  and  every-day  immorality 
A loose  and  dissolute  spirit  is  bred  by  it,  that  penetrates 
society  and  loosens  all  the  bonds  of  public  and  private  virtue. 
It  is  seen  in  the  quarrels  and  litigation,  the  riot  and  confusion 
which  it  breeds — in  the  debauchei’y  of  the  moral  sense  and  the 
reckless  intolerance  of  restraint  from  any  moral  considerations 
• — in  the  perpetual  tendency  which  it  engenders  to  overstep 
every  limit  of  order,  decorum,  and  virtue.  We  need  not 
dwell  on  consequences  so  obvious  to  every  eye.  They  are 
directly  fostered  and  perpetuated  by  the  Traflic. 

Closely  connected  with  its  demoralizing  influence  is  the 
disastrous  bearing  of  the  Traffic  on  the  jouritu  and  prevalence 
of  Religion.  It  creates  a condition  of  mind  in  the  individual 
and  in  a communit}’^  more  impervious  to  religious  truth  and 
influences  than  results  from  almost  any  other  cause.  W e know 
of  no  bari-iers  in  the  way  of  promoting  genuine  piety  equal  to 
those  j^resented  in  the  thriftless  and  decaying  condition  which 
is  brought  on  a community  by  the  jjrevalence  of  drinking  cu9- 
toms.  This  outward  decay  is  but  too  sure  an  index  of  disso 
hitcness  vrithin.  The  heart  has  lost  tone  and  vigor.  The  re- 
iigious  susceptibilities  are  blunted,  if  not  lost.  The  soul  is  bent 
downward  and  refuses  to  look  up.  The  sensual  spirit,  like  a 
strong  man  armed,  keeps  tlie  house.  In  innumerable  instances  the 
incipient  stages  of  l eligious  improvement  are  effectually  blight- 
ed, and  the  Spirit  of  God  repelled  from  the  soul  by  this  causa. 


SUPPRESSION  OF  THE  LIQUOR  TRAFFIC. 


21 


It  is  one  of  the  most  blessed  achievements  of  this  Reforma- 
Sion,  that  it  has  so  often  jjrepared  the  way  for  the  Gospel  to 
work  its  higher  reformation  in  the  entire  character  and  life. 
It  has  in  countless  instances  removed  impediments  that  had 
long  entirely  obstructed  all  gracious  impulses,  and  would  have 
rendered  them  abortive  forever.  Lying  undei'  the  bondage  of 
drink,  the  soul  is  hopeless  of  redemption.  These  chains  must 
be  broken,  this  moral  besotraent  must  be  removed,  before  the 
principle  of  purity  and  spiritual  life  can  enter  the  heart.  This 
has  been  witnessed  in  cases  beyond  iiumber  wherever  this  re 
form  has  taken  effect.  It  has  wrought  changes  that  paved 
the  way  for  better  changes.  A happy  multitude,  who  have 
thus  been  prepared  unto  good  and  brought  within  the  scope 
of  Christian  influences,  now  rank  among  the  accepted  mem- 
bers of  the  Christian  community  as  the  brightest  trophies  of 
this  reform. 

In  the  opposite  direction  we  meet  with  equally  convincing 
proofs  of  the  bearing  of  the  Traffic  upon  Religion  in  the  in- 
roads it  has  made  into  almost  every  Christian  community,  and 
the  blighted  hojies  and  wreck  of  good  it  has  ■wrought.  From 
the  Church,  as  from  every  other  sphere,  it  has  plucked  down 
many  of  the  briglitest  stars.  Probably  no  other  stumbling- 
stone  and  rock  of  offense  has  troubled  the  Church  like  this. 
Either  as  matter  or  motive  cause,  the  use  of  strong  drink 
enters  into  avast  proportion  of  the  offenses  which  weaken  and 
distract  the  churches  and  bring  scandal  on  religion. 

But  the  question  whether  a commonwealth  may  legitimately 
apply  legal  restraints  in  a matter  like  this,  may  be  felt  to  turn 
principally  upon  its  bearing  on  the  public  interests  and  well- 
being of  the  State.  In  other  words,  it  is  a political  evil ! 
Does  this  Traffic  injuriously  affect  the  sources  of  public  pros- 
perity and  happiness,  the  order,  peace,  and  strength  of  the 
State?  If  it  have  this  influence,  assuredly  it  is  among  the 
powers  and  prerogatives  of  the  Social  Body  to  guard  itself 
from  its  invasions.  In  what  relation,  then,  does  the  Traffic 
in  these  destructive  articles  stand  to  the  public  ■weal?  We 
confidently  re]dy,  in  that  of  a virulent  and  iri-econcilable  an- 
tagonism to  all  the  true  interests  of  a State.  Directly  and  m- 
dirtctly  it  .'s  at  war  with  all  the  mean?  and  ends  of  the  publie 


22 


StrPPKESSION  OF  THE  LIQUOE  TEAFFIC. 


good,  and  with  all  the  sources  of  political  prosperity.  A car^ 
ful  inspection  will  abundantly  sustain  this  charge,  and  remova 
evei-y  rational  objection  which  may  be  taken  to  the  applica- 
tion of  Law.  To  this  let  us  now  turn  our  inquiry. 

Shall  we  look  at  it  in  the  pecuniary  aspect  ? In  this  view 
il  touches  directly  only  the  coarsest  of  all  our  interests ; yet 
tliese  are  not  trivial,  certainly  not  least  considerable  iu  the 
estimation  of  men.  To  many  it  may  be  the  most  conclusive 
consideration  that  the  traffic  in  intoxicating  drinks,  beyond 
anything  else,  devours  the.  substance  and  enervates  all  the 
])ro<luctive  energies  of  the  people,  and  thus  preys  at  the  roots 
of  the  public  wealth.  The  wealth  of  a State  is  as  the  capital, 
and  means,  and  vigorous,  healthful,  industrial  faculty  of  its 
constituent  members.  This  proposition  will  open  at  once  to 
every  mind  the  relation  of  this  traffic  to  the  prosperity  of  a 
commonwealth. 

Set  down  first  in  the  account,  then,  as  the  least  item  by  far, 
the  millions  that  are  directly  squandered  for  these  useless  and 
pei'nicious  drinks.  We  shall  not  recite  statistics.  Thus  much 
is  ai  ('uce  withdrawn  from  the  stock  of  national  wealth,  and 
leaves  no  species  of  equivalent.  It  is  so  much  utterly  sunk ; 
and  it  falls  as  a tax  to  be  gathered  by  indirect  process*^  fiom 
the  pocket  of  the  State  through  the  pockets  of  the  people, 
d'lie  first  draft  may  be  on  the  consumer;  but  there  is  not  a 
man  of  us,  having  the  least  ta.xable  substance  or  accident,  who 
does  not  ultimately  come  in  for  his  share  in  the  burden.  Like 
oilier  war-debts,  it  must  be  liquidated  by  a scheme  of  uni- 
versal and  incessant  suction  so  covered  that  the  people  shall 
not  know  for  what  they  pay.  But  they  pay  for  it  none  tlio 
less. 

But  were  these  computable  millions  of  direct,  annual  ex- 
penditure for  drink  simply  sunk  and  done  with,  we  raighv 
congr.atulate  ourselves.  But,  alas!  it  has  become  a most  pro- 
iluctive  investment.  It  is  so  much  gone  to  purchase  seed  of 
evil,  and  sow  it  through  the  land,  to  bear  us  too  soon  a bar 
vest  of  incomputable  losses.  Trace  its  operation  as  it  per 
va.dcs  the  whole  social  body,  corrupting  ! abits  of  virtue  and 
tlirilt,  destro3'ing  industrjq  begetting  a vicious  and  spend- 
thrift spirit,  producing  povei  tjq  pauperism,  vagabondage,  and 


SUPPKESSION  OF  THE  LKSTJOK  TEAFPIO. 


23 


crime — aud  in  the  issue  imposing  a burden  on  the  remaining 
industry  and  thrift  of  the  community  many  times  greater  than 
the  original  expenditure.  On  these  points  no  statistics  can 
more  than  approximate  tlie  truth ; and  none  will  be  needed 
by  considerate  minds.  No  figures  can  fairly  represent  these 
ruinous  inlluences  at  woidc  on  the  vitals  of  public  prosperity. 
For  llie  crime  and  jiauperisra,  some  approach  could  be  made 
to  an  accurate  estimate  of  cost  to  the  State.  But  the  humane 
and  reflective  mind  will  see  in  these  things  worse  evils  than 
taxation,  and  worse  relations  to  the  public  good  than  that  of 
pecuniary  cost.  Annually  there  are  men  lost  to  themselves 
and  to  the  State  whose  worth  no  millions  could  represent. 
And  how  shall  we  compute  what  is  lost  in  the  wreck  of  talents 
and  virtue,  the  sacrifice  of  character  and  life  ? Here  we  touch 
upon  a relation  of  the  Traffic  to  the  public  welfare  of  the  very 
deepest  interest.  It  presses  destructively  on  that  vital  con- 
nection which  subsists  between  the  virtue  of  a people  and  the 
well-being  of  a State.  The  body  can  not  be  sound  if  the 
members  are  diseased.  That  national  prosperity  must  be 
only  apparent  which  is  not  simply  the  out-bloom  of  a people’s 
virtue,  the  flush  of  a popular  moral  health.  What  estimate, 
then,  is  to  be  put  on  the  influence  of  an  infection  like  this, 
which  circulates  through  every  vein  of  the  body,  and  intro- 
duces derangement  into  all  the  functions  on  which  the  general 
welfare  depends ! There  can  be  no  surer  curse  of  a common- 
wealth than  one  which  thus  inflicts  its  wounds  secretly  and 
incessantly  on  all  the  private,  social,  and  moral  virtues. 

Such  is  the  Traffic,  feebly  delineated.  Only  an  outline  has 
been  attempted,  Avhich  the  reader  can  All  up  with  facts  and 
instances  within  his  own  observation.  It  is  a God-forbidden 
business,  and  wages  open  and  cruel  war  on  every  human  in- 
terest. Its  mischiefs  and  abominations  are  wrought  before 
every  man’s  eyes.  In  every  neighborhood  there  is  mouiaiing 
over  its  rav.ages,  and  they  are  few  who  have  not  felt  the  iron 
entering  their  own  hearts  in  the  anguish  and  shame  inflicted 
by  loved  ones  lost.  No  laws,  though  enacted  by  the  unani- 
mous vote  of  the  human  race,  could  make  it  anything  but  a 
eriine  to  drive  this  trade  of  death. 

Now  if  year  by  year,  as  the  popular  sentiment  has  been 


24 


BtrPPEESSION  OF  THE  LTQUOE  TEAFFIC. 


corrected,  we  have  urged,  and  are  evermore  urging,  our  re 
strictions  on  tliis  traflic  as  far  as  we  can,  causing  our  proliib 
itory  statutes  to  tread  close  on  tlie  lieels  of  the  retreating  foe, 
and  watching  eagerly  for  the  first  moment  when  entire  pro. 
hibition  shall  be  in  our  power,  then  are  we  innocent.  But  if, 
through  oiir  indifference  and  neglect,  this  horrid  business  en- 
joys any  beyond  the  least  degree  of  legal  toleration  to  which 
we  could  reduce  it,  we  are  fearfully  implicated  in  its  guilt. 
To  resist  sucli  an  enemy  with  vigilance  and  a zealous  activity 
proportioned  to  the  evil,  is  the  simple,  dutj'  of  every  man,  and 
the  especial  calling  of  every  friend  of  Temperance. 

The  Right  of  a Commonwealth  to  Prohibit  the  Traffic. 

But  it  is  urged  by  many  that  legal  prohibition  would  in- 
volve an  invasion  of  certain  just  rights  and  liberties.  This 
business  has  so  long  enjoyed  legal  protection,  that  it  now 
claims  to  be  regarded  as  pre-eminently  and  inherently  “a 
lawful  business.”  And  this  claim  must,  perhaps,  still  receive 
consideration. 

A lawful  business  it  undoubtedly  is,  while  protected  bylaw 
But  its  only  defense  is  in  the  statute,  on  which,  by  the  grace 
of  a deluded  people,  it  is  permitted  to  l(>an.  It  is  so  nomin. 
ated  in  the  bond.  Let  it  be  once  stripped  of  this  factitious 
protection,  and  it  stands  a naked  and  glaring  nuisance,  de- 
serving beyond  any  other  to  be  instantly  and  indignantly 
chased  from  the  haunts  of  men.  Repeal  these  statutes  which 
now  shield  it,  and  this  business,  resting  on  its  own  merits, 
would  be  indictable  at  Common  Law.  We  could  bring  the 
dealer  to  justice  on  the  manifest  tendencies  of  his  traffic,  and 
as  a wanton  and  felonious  triller  with  the  peace  and  virtue 
of  society.  While  Law  embodies  the  full  temperance  senti- 
ment of  the  community,  and  bears  with  all  practicable  force 
against  the  Traffic,  it  is  well  to  have  law  ; but  if  we  are  left  to 
choose  between  no  Law,  and  such  as  for  many  years  has  at 
once  stimulated  and  shielded  the  Traffic,  give  us  none.  Leave 
us  to  deal  with  it  simply  as  an  unprotected  nuisance.  Yes, 
this  !=•  a kncfid  business,  e.vceedingl}’  so  , and  that  is  the  very 
[)oint  of  our  inquirj-,  whether  we  shall  longer  legalize  this 
incomparable  curse  ? 


BUrPKBSSION  OF  THE  LIQUOK  TEAFFIO. 


J i 

But  tlie  claim  goes  further,  and  denies  the  right  ot  society 
to  interdict  the  Traffic.  We  reply,  it  is  the  main  prerogative 
of  a civil  government  to  pi'ohibit  just  such  things  as  tl)is. 
Protection  is  its  end  and  business — the  protection  of  the  pos- 
sessions, the  rights,  the  industry,  and  the  virtue  of  a commu- 
flity  from  the  invasions  of  the  lawless  and  mischievous. 
Hence  the  main  funct'on  of  a C4overnment  i?,  prohibition.  Its 
office  is  to  supeivise  tlie  complicated  and  often  clashing  oper- 
ations of  self-love  among  the  associated  thousands  of  whom 
Bociety  is  composed,  and  restrain  its  injurious  workings.  Wa 
need  a civil  government  simply  because  in  the  social  state  we 
are  exposed  to  injury  from  the  evil-minded.  Its  end  is  pro- 
tection; and  its  power  to  protect  lies  in  this  very  power , to 
prohibit  whatever  conflicts  with  social  order  and  private 
rights.  Turn  now  to  our  Statute  Law,  and  you  will  find  this 
the  real  meaning  of  each  enactment.  Moi'e  or  less  obviously, 
each  statute  is  ^protective  prohibition.  It  presupposes  some 
lawful  interest  endangered,  some  laudable  pursuit  molested, 
some  social  or  individual  riglit  invaded;  and  the  statute  is 
the  arm  of  the  social  body  stretched  forth  to  protect  the 
violated  right  by  prohibiting  the  invasion. 

The  only  question  then  can  be,  does  the  Traffic  in  alcoholic 
drinks  inflict  any  serious  injury  on  the  rights,  interests,  aflfec- 
tions,  or  virtue  of  the  community?  By  th.at  issue  it  must 
abide.  It  stands  impeached  in  the  name  of  every  virtue,  in 
the  name  of  all  things  pure  and  beautiful  and  blessed,  as  the 
pitiless  invader  of  them  all ! Where  else  is  there  such  another 
gushing  fountain  of  derangement  to  all  the  interests  of  the 
social  state?  Society  has  no  other  enemy  so  injurious  as  this 
■ — none  from  which  all  just  rights  and  interests  so  earnestly 
cry  aloud  for  i)rotection.  We  have  pampered  this  traffic  with 
our  sanctions  till  it  has  wmxed  fat  and  kicks  at  all  restrictions. 
It  devours  its  victims  at  noonday,  and  sows  the  land  with 
Ihrifilessness  and  immorality,  violence  and  crime — and  paivsea 
from  its  banquetings  on  broken  hearts,  and  laiined  hopes,  and 
fallen  character,  only  to  tell  us  with  a front  of  brass  that  we 
have  no  remedy!  We  may  proliibit  theft  and  arson  and 
Beveral  other  things,  but  not  this!  Away  with  a Govern- 
meul,  then,  as  soon  as  you  please;  it  is  an  unmeaning  and 


26 


StJPPRESSIOIf  OF  THE  LIQHOR  TRAFFIC. 


worthless  thing  if  you  deny  it,  on  prin.jjde,  the  power  and 
tlie  right  to  protect  us  by  prohibiting  such  warfare  on  the 
social  good. 

Bui  we  must  Lsten  for  a moment  to  the  dealers  and  their 
constituents.  “You  invade  our  liberties;  we  have  a natural 
right  to  deal  and  drink  as  we  please.”  Let  it  be  admitted 
that  you  liave  a natural  right  to  do  so ; but  recollect  the 
whole  theory  of  which  this  is  a part.  Recollect  where  you 
are.  We  are  not  savages.  It  is  a good  thing,  we  find,  for  men 
to  dwell  together  in  the  social  state;  but  in  the  social  state, 
as  this  theory  goes,  every  member  yields  mar  y points  of  natu- 
ral liberty,  as  tlie  price  of  protection  from  the  injurious  action 
of  others.  Go  forth,  then,  out  of  the  social  state,  away  from 
any  society  of  your  fellow-beings  to  be  injured  by  your  doings, 
and  then  you  may  do  what  yon  please,  unre;-Ja‘icted^by  human 
law.  There  you  may  enjoy  this  jirocions  natui-al  right  to 
traffic  in  alcohol,  and  to  make  yourselves  maniacs,  ready  for 
any  deed,  by  the  use  of  it.  There,  too,  you  may  sell  arsenic, 
may  curse  and  blaspheme,  profirne  the  Sabbath,  and  take  what 
you  can  by  the  sole  law  of  the  strong  hand.  There  you  may 
turn  to  the  left,  instead  of  the  right,  on  the  highway;  may 
set  your  slangliterhouse  where  you  choose ; maj'  coin  your 
own  money,  fire  your  own  dwelling.  All  these  are  as  ti  nly 
natural  lights,  and  quite  as  defensible,  as  that  which  you 
claim.  But  as  a member  of  a confederated  human  society, 
you  may  not  do  these  tilings.  Why  ? Because  others  have 
lights  as  well  as  you.  The  common  good  requires  that  you 
ibrego  these  things.  That  is  the  condition  on  which  we,  any 
of  us,  remain  in  society  and  enjoy  its  advantages.  There  is 
no  compulsion — go,  if  you  like — go,  if  you  deem  these  conces- 
sions of  natural  liberty  too  high  a price  to  pay  for  the  social 
benefits.  Go  where  you  can  do  better.  But  if  you  stay  here 
in  the  organized  society  of  men,  you  do  it  as  consenting  to 
forego  these,  and  whatsoever  other  so-called  natural  rights, 
which  that  society  shall  find  it  necessary  to  prohibit  as  incoii- 
Bistent  with  the  common  well-being.  Here,  as  a social  being, 
you  must  turn  to  the  right  on  the  highway — no  sort  of -iberty 
left  you  to  turn  to  the  left.  Here  you  may  by  no  means  coin 
your  own  money.  And  here,  on  infinitely  higher  grounds, 


SUPPRESSION  OF  THE  LIQUOR  TRAFFIC. 


27 


if  ever  consideration  shall  visit  the  souls  uf  men.  and  outraged 
society  shall  come  to  look  at  this  matter  with  a sober  eye, 
nere,  then,  you  will  have  no  right  to  wage  at  our  charges  this 
warfare  on  all  we  hold  dear. 

It  will  throw  light  enough  on  the  propriety  a^jd  duty  ol 
legislation  in  this  matter  should  we  look  out  over  our  Statute 
Law  and  notice  our  legal  treatment  of  certain  other  evils,  the 
loins  of  which  are  not  so  thick  as  the  little  finger  of  this  traffic 
in  alcoholic  drinks.  It  would  be  edifying  also  to  the  advocates 
of  natural  rights  to  consider  how  exten.S'ively  they  are  bereft 
of  their  liberties  by  submitting  to  the  social  state.  If,  indeed, 
we  have  no  right  to  prohibit  this  traffic — if  every  restriction 
laid  on  this  and  like  things  be  an  invasion  of  their  rights — 
then  have  the  whole  body  of  retailers  and  their  abettors,  and 
all  other  aggrieved  persons,  in  view  of  the  multitude  of  ag- 
gressive en3.ctments  of  the  same  character,  just  cause  to  declare 
themselves  oppressed  beyond  endurance,  and  taking  up  each 
one  his  cup  and  his  keg,  cry,  “ Let  us  depart  hence.” 

If  it  be  the  right  and  duty  of  a Legislature,  watching  over 
the  interests  of  society,  to  interdict  a demoralizing  game,  how 
is  it  not  mucli  more  its  right  and  duty  to  prohibit  as  far  as 
possible  a traffic  which  hourly  proves  itself  an  agent  of  mis- 
chief with  which  no  other  can  compare?  If  liberty  can  sur- 
vive the  one,  how  is  it  that  the  very  peril  of  our  liberties 
should  be  cloven  down  by  the  other?  Yet  you  remember 
Avhat  wailing  and  fierce  protestations  were  heard  from  the 
champions  of  liberty  and  liquor  against  that  unconstitutional 
statute  which  merely  submitted  it  directly  to  the  people  them- 
selves in  their  primary  assemblies  to  say  whether  they  would 
invade  their  own  liberties  in  this  tender  point! 

And  many  such  things  has  social  law  presumed  to  decree 
A>n  all  hands  lie  our  natural  liberties  smitten  down  by  statute 
We  prohibit  theft,  for  example  ; but  for  what  reasons  that  di 
not  with  tenfold  force  demand  the  prohibition  of  this  traffic . 
Is  theft  at  war  with  the  social  interests  ? Doubtless  it  is ; but 
the  worst  it  does  is  but  an  occasional  skirmish  on  some  ol  the 
coarser  interests  of  mankiiul,  compa'ed  with  the  havoc  this 
traffic  continually  makes  of  all  that  men  shouid  most  highlj 
prize  and  most  earnestly  defend. 


2S 


SUPPEESSION  OF  THE  LIQUOK  TEAFFIC. 


“ In  which  is  felt,  the  flercer  blast, 

Of  the  destroying  Angel’s  breath  ? 

Which  hinds  its  victim  the  more  fast? 

Which  aims  at  him  the  deadlier  death  f 
Will  ye  the  felon  fox  restrain, 

And  yet  take  oft'  the  tiger’s  chain  ? ” 

Yot  the  we  sedulously  hedge  about  with  protective  stat 
ates,  while  character  and  social  morality,  the  lieaits  and  soul* 
of  men,  are  open  game  for  this  legalized  system  of  freeboot* 
hig  ! Counterfeiting  we  can  not  tolerate  for  a moment,  for  a 
false  bill  is  detestable  and  sorely  injurious;  but  a system 
svhich  continually  produces  and  palms  off  on  us  the  worst 
counterfeits  of  humanity,  in  the  form  of  inebriated  men,  is 
most  abundantly  lawful ! The  ddirium  tremens  closely  re- 
geinbles  and  often  surpasses  in  its  hori’ors  those  of  hydro- 
'phobia  ; and  hundreds  perish  over  the  land  by  that  terrific 
mania  irom  drink,  to  one  that  dies  by  the  bite  of  a rabid  dog. 
Yet  it  needs  not  five  cases  of  hydrophobia  per  annum  in  the 
nation  to  keep  every  neigliborhood  so  tremblingly  alive  to  the 
possibility  of  its  occurrence,  that  an  animal,  showing  the 
slightest  symptoms  of  madness,  finds  instant  death  or  eftectual 
restraint.  We  stumble  at  no  plea  for  liberty  in  that  matter. 
He  would  be  dealt  with  as  an  execrable  oftender  who  should 
spare  him  one  moment  at  large.  But  to  traffic  in  an  article 
which,  evei'v  year  th.at  rolls  over  us,  ripens  for  us  a thousand 
times  so  many  maniacs,  pushed  shrieking,  trembling,  specter- 
ridden  to  the  grave — a traffic  that  directly  produces  every 
year  more  mischief  and  agony  than  all  mad  animals  have 
caused  for  the  last  fifty  years — that,  forsooth,  is  a right  to  be 
held  sacredly  inviolate ! In  the  name  of  Liberty  and  Law, 
this  maddest  of  all  things  mad,  that  fastens  its  tooth  in  the 
soul  as  well  as  the  body,  shall  even  have  most  public  and 
eligible  places  appointed  it,  shall  be  lifted  up  by  authority  in 
conspicuous  and  alluring  array,  crowds  shall  be  drawn  within 
kts  reach,  and  abundant  fiicilitie&be  given  it  to  strike  its  deadly 
fangs  into  as  many. as  possible!  And  the  attempt  to  di'ive  it 
fiom  these  public  haunts,  and  break  up  the  reign  of  madness, 
and  shield  society  from  this  bitterest  of  its  curses,  is  the  in 
vaaion  of  rights  so  loudly  complained  of  among  us ! 

But  there  is  a view  still  more  conclusive  in  justification  oi 


StTPPKESSTON  OF  THE  LIQHOE  TKAFFIC. 


2S 

prohibitory  Law  in  this  case.  All  legislative  action  touching 
this  traffic  has  been,  and  from  the  nature  of  the  case  must  be, 
pronibitory  in  its  aim  and  operation.  Suppose  a time  when 
as  yet  no  statute  touched  this  traffic,  but  all  enjoyed  the  natu- 
ral right  to  deal  at  their  pleasure  in  alcoholic  d^nks.  Pres- 
entlj^  some  measures  of  self-defense  are  found  necessary.  The 
[license  scheme  is  adoj^ted.  What  is  it?  It  is  a prohihition 
of  the  Traffic,  ev^^^ept  by  a certain  few,  and  in  a certain  way. 
A.  B,  and  C,  imd  2r  specified  limitations  may  sell — all  the  rest 
3f  the  alphabet  may  not.  The  very  first  step  settles  the  whole 
question.  It  is  based  on  the  right  to  prohibit.  From  the 
bcgiuni:  g Society  has  assumed  the  right  in  question,  and  a 
scries  of  statutes  of  a prohibitory  nature  have  been  enacted, 
under  the  name  of  License  Laws,  loose  and  utterly  inadequate, 
it  may  be,  but  nevertheless  restrictive  of  the  Traffic,  and  estab- 
lishing forever  the  right  to  restrict  to  the  uttermost.  Thus 
the  thing  comes  down  to  us  branded  from  of  old  as  a nuisance, 
with  which  Law  not  only  has  a right  to  deal  according  to  its 
deserts,  but  which  it  has  no  right  to  let  alone.  The  only 
questions  are,  what  treatment  does  it  deserve  at  the  hand  of 
human  society,  and  how  far  are  we  able  to  treat  it  as  it 
deserves  ? 

This  restrictive  system  was  very  early  adopted.  Even 
while  society  was  steeped  in  strong  drink,  it  was  felt  to  be  an 
evil  and  a bitter  thing.  Like  a raging  beast,  it  must  be 
guarded.  The  attempt  was  made  to  methodize  the  madness, 
and  reduce  it  to  decency  and  order.  Our  fathers  accordingly 
took  the  Traffic  out  of  the  hands  of  the  multitude  and  gave  it 
in  charge  to  discreet  and  trustworthy  men,  numerous  enough 
that  none  need  go  thirsty,  elevated  to  the  rank  of  civil  func- 
tionaries, and  commissioned  to  furnish  this  indispensable  but 
perilous  article  discreetly,  “for  the  public  good.”  Instead 
of  a reproach,  considering  the  time,  it  is  a genuine  compliment 
to  the  character  of  deacons  that  they  so  often  were  the  men 
chosen  to  conduct  this  difficult  business.  They  remained  in  it 
too  long ; but  it  is  a high  testimonial  of  their  worth  and  of 
the  esteem  in  whi(',h  they  were  held,  that  when  a drinking 
generation  felt  urged  tc  seek  out  in  all  their  coasts  the  men 
who  would  put  the  bottle  to  their  lips  'in  a sober  and  becom* 


SUPPRESSION  OF  THE  LIQUOR  TRAFFIC. 


ing  and  make  them  drunken  also  Avith  graA’ity  and  dis< 
cretton,  they  so  often  selected  the  deacons  to  do  it. 

Now  this  is  worthy  of  notice,  that  from  the  £rst  we  haA’e 
had  restrictions  on  the  Traffic.  Let  us  do  justice  to  our  fa- 
thers. VVitji^all  their  infatuation  on  the  subject,  they  hai  e 
left  us  t'  eir  solemn  testimonial  that  the  ox  gores  so  he  must 
not  go  at  large.  In  saying  that  this  and  that  man  might  sell, 
they  prohibited  the  sale  by  others.  The  form  was  permissive, 
but  the  whole  purpose  and  effect  restrictive. 

It  is  painful  to  think  of  more  recent  legislation  in  this  light. 
Instead  of  an  advance  corresponding  to  the  groAvth  of  the 
temperance  sentiment  among  us,  instead  of  applying  new 
checks  and  limitations,  such  as  the  advancing  reform  author- 
ized and  demanded,  we  hav'e  suffered  LaAv  too  often  to  reverse 
its  action  and  operate  as  the  ally  of  vice.  And  the  Avhole 
work  must  continue  to  stand  very  nearly  as  it  noAv  does,  until 
we  condense  this  abundant  temperance  sentiment  into  LaAV, 
and  precijhtate  our  whole  force  against  the  Traffic. 

But  there  is  quite  another  aspect  to  this  question  of  rights. 
Others  too  have  rights  and  interests  as  well  as  those  who  deal 
and  those  who  drink.  Civil  go\  ernment  is  not  framed  for  the 
sole  behoof  of  retailers  and  their  supporters.  It  has  certain 
other  aims  and  uses  than  to  secure  to  them  the  largest  liberty 
in  matters  of  drink.  Tax-payers  also  have  rights  and  interests. 
They  are  a class  Avorthy  of  some  regard.  Without  constant 
access  to  their  pockets,  this  traffic  would  soon  cut  off  its  own 
supplies  and  perish  by  suicide.  As  it  is,  it  has  a lien  on  tho 
entire  social  body.  Aside  from  the  incalculable  indirect  waste 
and  damage,  this  traffic  cre.ates  four-fifths  of  all  our  pauperism, 
and  taxes  every  ratable  dollar  of  our  property  for  its  support. 
It  occasions  three-fourths  of  our  crimes  and  criminal  prosecu- 
tions, and  of  our  police  and  prison  provisions,  and  hands  over 
the  heavy  bill  to  be  borne  by  the  virtue  and  thrift  of  the  com- 
munity.  It  creates  crime  for  tis  to  mourn  over  and  punish 
and  pay  for,  and  beggars  for  us  to  pity  and  feed.  It  infuses 
its  poison  through  every  vein  of  society,  fostering  every  vice, 
stimulating  every  bad  passion,  and  sealing  bespotted  souls  to 
perdition.  Whatever  villainy  can  devise  of  knaA'ery  and  vio- 
lence, this  traffic  matures  and  pushes  to  execution.  All  who 


SUPPRESSION  OF  THE  LIQUOR  TRAFFIC. 


31 


have  hearts  to  bleed  over  sin  and  anguish — aU  wlio  have  loved 
ones  in  peril  from  the  seductions  of  vice — every  friend  of  virtue 
and  order — eveiy  man  contributing  to  the  support  of  society — ■ 
all  who  care  for  themselves  or  care  for  others,  have  rights  and 
interests  in  this  matter. 

Instead,  therefore,  of  this  preposterous  clamor  of  dealers 
and  their  partisans  for  liberty  to  wage  at  our  cost  a deadly 
piracy  on  all  our  just  riglits  and  dearest  interests,  it  is  time 
the  tables  were  turned,  and  a peremptory  demand  made  of 
these  men  that  they  cease  swiftly  from  that  business,  and  be- 
take themselves  at  their  earliest  possible  convenience  to  some 
honest  and  innocent  calling. 

The  Character  of  those  Engaged  in  the  Traffic. 

It  is  only  in  one  point  of  view  that  we  wish  to  speak  of  the 
character  of  those  who  are  engaged  in  this  business.  We 
shall  find  in  it  an  additional  and  conclusive  argument  for  the 
application  of  Law.  ISTothing  short  of  Law  will  avail  rrs  in 
dealing  with  such  men.  Gradually  for  twenty  years  the  busi- 
ness of  rum-selling  has  been  sinking  lower  and  lower,  and  in 
the  same  degree  has  sunk  the  character  of  those  who  can 
aflford  to  engage  in  it.  By  a necessity  of  the  case,  it  has  fallen 
more  and  more  into  the  hands  of  men  bankrupt  in  conscience 
and  humanity, — of  men,  who,  as  a class,  are  beyond  being 
disgraced  by  any  business.  Those  with  whom  reason  and 
moral  considerations  would  have  weight,  have  quit  the  busi- 
ness long  ago.  With  such  a race  of  dealers  we  can  wield  no 
efiectual  argument  but  that  of  Law. 

In  any  other  light  than  this,  it  would  not  be  of  much  prac- 
tical importance  what  we  are  to  think  of  the  individual  agents 
in  such  a business.  Be  the  dealer  what  he  may,  it  alters  net 
the  thing  he  does.  It  is  that  we  have  to  do  with.  There 
may  be  individuals  engaged  in  some  forms  of  the  Traffic  who 
are  in  other  respects  estimable  men.  They  may  not  merit 
entire  reprobation.  We  can  look  at  them  only  with  surprise 
2nd  grief.  But  with  dealers  as  a class,  the  case  is  very  differ- 
ent. They  are  in  it  as  a congenial  calling.  As  there  is  m 
nature  no  rottenness  so  loathsome  that  it  does  not  furnish  the 
most  attractive  condition  for  some  vile  form  of  animal  fife,  so 


32 


SUPPEESSION  OF  THE  EIQUOK  TKAFFIC. 


there  are  men  who  find  this  trade  of  corrupting  their  fellow 
with  all  the  moral  and  physical  filth  that  gathers  around  the 
dram-shop,  just  their  congenial  work.  And  the  wonder  is 
that  aU  but  such  do  not  instinctively  revolt  from  such  a busi- 
ness, and  leave  it  wholly  in  the  hands  of  those  whose  gift  it 
is  to  relish  a work  so  mischievous  and  vile.  But  while  there 
is  this  difference  in  the  men,  their  work  is  the  same — perhaps 
even  worse,  if  you  weigh  the  whole  influence  of  his  doings, 
when  done  by  the  quite  respectable  man  who  lends  himself  to 
this  strange  work,  than  when  done  by  those  whose  vocation 
it  is  to  do  evil.  It  is  ours  to  put  au  end  to  such  a work,  by 
whomsoever  it  may  be  done. 

But  let  us  look  at  the  RumseUer,  that  we  may  know  with 
whom  we  have  to  deal.  He  is  a man  selling  for  gain  what  he 
knows  to  be  worthless  and.  pernicious,  good  for  none,  dan- 
gerous to  all,  deadly  to  many.  He  has  looked  in  the  face  the 
sure  consequences  of  his  course,  and  if  he  can  but  make  gain 
of  it,  is  })re])ared  to  corrupt  the  souls,  embitter  the  lives,  and 
blast  the  prosperity  of  an  indefinite  number  of  his  fellow 
creatures.  By  the  vending  of  these  drinks  he  sees  that  with 
terrible  certainty,  along  with  the  havoc  of  health,  lives,  homes, 
and  souls  of  men,  he  can  succeed  in  setting  afloat  a certain 
vast  amount  of  property,  and  that  as  it  is  thrown  to  the  winds, 
some  small  share  of  it  will  float  within  his  grasp.  Upon  that 
chance  he  acts.  He  knows  that  if  men  remain  virtuous  and 
thrifty,  if  these  homes  around  him  continue  peaceful  and  joy. 
ous,  his  craft  can  not  prosj^er.  But  if  the  virus  of  drink  can 
only  be  made  to  work,  swfft  desolation  will  come  of  it,  and 
every  pang  will  bring  him  pelf — each  broken  heart  will  net 
him  so  much  cash — so  much  from  each  blasted  home  and 
shame-stricken  family — so  much  a widow — so  much  an  or- 
phan ! He  does  not  expect  to  win  all  that  he  causes  otherj 
to  lose;  so  fitr  from  that,  he  is  pierfectly  aware  that  only  a 
meagre  percentage  of  the  wreck  will  find  its  way  into  his 
hand.  Yet  for  this  he  sets  it  all  afloat!  He  fires  a city  that 
ru'  may  pilfer  in  the  crowd. — There  arc  certain  wild  shores 
in>  ested  by  bands  of  W reckers,  Avhose  business  it  is  to  watch 
along  their  dangerous  coasts  and  seize  whatever  may  float 
within  their  reach  from  the  wrecks  on  the  neighboring  shoals 


8DPPEESSI0N  OF  THE  LIQHOK  TKAFFIC. 


3S 


To  increase  their  chance  of  such  accursed  spoil,  they  set  them- 
selves systematically  to  work  to  bring  about  as  many  ship- 
wrecks as  they  can  — false  signals  are  given — beacons  quenched 
— movable  lights  devised,  and  every  means  employed  to  de 
coy  vessels  in  the  oiling  upon  the  fatal  shore.  Figure  that 
scene,  when  night  and  storm  are  on  the  deep,  and  the  tem- 
pest liowls  along  the  fa,tal  reef ; and  through  the  darkness, 
faintly  heard  above  the  roar  of  the  surge,  comes  the  boom  of 
a signal-gun,  announcing  a vessel  in  distress ! A moment 
more  and  it  comes  again,  more  distinct,  and  yonder,  at  length, 
its  light  trembles  to  the  eye,  as  some  billow  tosses  it  above 
the  horizon.  The  wad  of  despair  already  comes  to  the  aching 
ear ! And  here  on  the  shore  are  voices  heard,  and  torches 
glance,  but  not  in  pity  or  for  help ; and  on  the  clilf  above 
burns  the  false  beacon  that  lured  them  to  the  rocks ! A mo- 
ment more  and  she  strikes!  And  for  an  instant,  while  the 
storm  lulls  as  if  relenting,  you  hear  the  shrieks  of  the  lost,  the 
cry  of  the  spent  swimmer,  and  the  crash  of  the  vessel  as  she 
spills  her  treasures  and  lives  into  the  deep ! Witness  wh.at 
joy  is  felt  on  that  shore ! Their  work  has  prospered.  A 
little  floats  to  their  hands — but  ah ! how  little  of  all  that  pre- 
cious cargo!  Yet  that  is  their  reward.  For  this  they  lured 
so  much  to  destruction.  Such  is  their  business — and  the 
brother  of  it  is  here  among  us,  this  trade  in  drinks.  There  is 
a circumstantial  horror  thrown  around  the  one,  while  the  other 
works  more  quietly,  under  cover,  and  by  piecemeal ; but  in 
this  essential  feature  they  stand  side  by  side— they  each  create 
a vast,  indefinite  amount  of  woe  and  damage  to  others,  that 
out  of  the  terrible  wreck  they  may  gain  a little  ! And  if  the 
one  desein  es  legal  protection,  give  it  to  the  other  too. 

To  balance  all  this  fearful  array  of  mischief  and  wo,  flowing 
directly  from  his  work,  the  dealer  can  bring  nothing  but  tht 
pk-a  that  appetite  has  been  gratified,  and  “ some,  since  many 
die,  have  lived  by  rum.”  There.are  profits,  doubtless:  Doacb 
finds  it  the  most  liberal  purveyor  for  his  horrid  banquet ; ano 
Hell  from  beneath  is  moved  with  delight  at  the  fast-coming 
profits  of  the  trade;  and  the  dealer  also  gets  gain.  Deach, 
ilell,  and  the  Dealer — beyond  this  partnership  none  are  pi  of 
iied.  Not  we — we  have  only  to  look  on,  give  license,  furnish 


S4  SUPPRESSION  OF  THE  LIQUOR  TRAFFIC. 

victims,  pay  so  much  on  the  dollar  to  sustain  the  operation, 
and  bury  the  dead  from  our  sight ! 

We  meet  with  the  Traffic  in  intoxicating  drinks  imder  two 
forms,  differing  circumstantially,  and  viewed  too  generally 
wdth  very  difierent  feelings.  On  the  one  hand  we  have  it  in 
hs  own  proper  shape,  undisguised,  standing  on  its  bare  merits, 
in  the  simple  grog-shop  system ; on  the  other,  we  have  the 
same  traffic  in  the  covert  and  disguised  form  in  which  it  ap- 
pears wedded  to  the  Tavern  system.  With  the  same  deadly 
weapon,  the  one  strikes  ojjenly,  the  other  under  cover.  Yet 
the  latter  seems  to  many,  in  virtue  of  its  connection  with  Inn- 
keeping, almost  Btript  of  its  deformity  ; and  even  among  those 
who  condemn  it,  and  who  are  convinced  that  the  sale  of  these 
drinks  can  never  m any  form  be  harmless,  this  is  the  last  point 
on  which  they  see  clearly.  The  old  prejudice,  the  power  of 
custom,  lingers  in  us  still,  and  holds  us  too  often  divided  be- 
tween speculative  soundness  and  practical  delusion. 

Tlae  Dram-Shop  Traffic. 

In  .-espect  to  the  class  of  dealers  in  this  form  of  the  Traffic, 
legal  restraint  is  so  far  from  being  a premature  method  of 
treatment,  that  it  is  wonderful  we  have  not  long  since  quit 
every  other  method  as  impertiught  to  the,  case.  Let  us  under- 
stand our  error.  Legalize  the  Traffic,  and  there  will  not  be 
wanting  those  who  vvill  carry  it  on ; and  though  they  were  to 
be,  at  the  first,  the  most  conscientious  and  tender-hearted  of 
men,  let  them  be  schooled  for  a little  time  in  the  Traffic, 
familiar  with  all  the  effects  of  drink,  daily  making  men  drunken 
with  their  own  hands,  and  pocketing  by  threepenuies  the 
price  of  blood,  and  presently  you  have  beings  made  of  them 
steeled  against  all  that  other  men  feel.  Waste  no  argument 
on  such.  Make  it  legal  and  gainful  to  sell,  and  they’ll  sell 
Tbfc  clink  of  the  sixpence  from  the  palsied  hand  of  a custo- 
mer sounds  louder  in  their  ears  than  the  wail  of  the  widow 
and  orphan,  sweeter  than  the  praise  ol  all  the  good. 

Look  at  what  he  does.  He  sells  the  provocative  of  every 
ehame  and  every  sin.  All  forms  of  distempered  fancy,  wild 
and  evil  desires,  unhallowed  jjasrions,  madness  of  brain,  tho 
heart  to  cherish  anc  the  hand  to..execute  the  promptings  of 


eupPKESsio^r  op  the  liquok  teaffic. 


35 


the  Tempter — these  are  his  wares.  On  his  counter  he  sees 
laid  down  all  things  prized  among  men,  in  barter  for  the  mad- 
dening di-aught.  And  he  knows  his  work.  It  is  Aviitten  on 
the  squalid  and  haggard  persons  of  his  victims.  Day  by  day, 
as  they  visit  his  counter,  he  sees  the  progressive  debasement 
and  shame  he  is  working.  He  marks  the  fiercer  thirst  that 
drives  the  ripening  sot  more  frequently  to  his  haunt — the 
hand  more  tremulous  to-day — the  raiment  more  filthy  and 
worn — he  sees  the  growing  debauchery,  and  gives  him  still 
the  “ wet  damnation  ” that  has  caused  it  all.  Around  him  he 
reads  his  work  in  dilapidated  dwellings  and  mortgaged  farms, 
that  have  dropped,  bit  by  bit,  through  his  till.  And  these 
are  to  him  the  tokens  of  a thrifty  trade.  Pie  must  order 
larger  supplies.  Like  the  serpent  fascinating  the  bird,  and 
gloating  on  his  prey  as  it  flutters  around  him  in  ever  narrower 
circles — such  a thing  is  the  grog-vender;  and  around  him 
hover,  smitten  and  infatuated,  *^he  crowd  of  his  victims,  draw- 
ing ever  nigher  unto  death.  Of  aU  that  vice  and  wo  and 
growing  infamy,  he  there  is  the  master-spirit.  He  kindled  it, 
and  fattens  on  it.  Now  give  such  men  the  sanction  of  Law, 
and  what  will  your  moral  suasion  avail? 

Let  us  well  understand  that  this  business  has  no  claim  on 
our  forbearance.  No  just  interest  or  right  will  be  invaded  by 
the  most  summary  proscription.  Perverted  Law  has  long 
allowed  the  dealer  his  pound  of  flesh  out  of  us,  and  coolly  he 
has  taken  it,  and  patiently  we  have  borne  it.  We  abide  by 
Law.  While  it  compels  us  to  stand  the  passive  spectators  of 
his  ravages,  we  do  so  ; but  no  longer.  We  propose  to  abide 
by  Law  still.  W e look  on  the  drunkard-maker,  with  all  the 
license  earth  could  give  him,  simply  as  a privileged  malefactor. 
In  all  his  pomp  of  otfice,  though  rich  in  blood-bought  bank  stock 
and  potters-field  farms,  ho  is  one  whom  half  the  poor  wretches 
Le  has  bred  for  the  prison  might  blush  to  be  seen  with.  Be- 
tween him  and  them  the  only  partition  is  that  thin  bit  of  paper 
called  a license.  The  wealth  he  gets  is  the  monument  of  his  in- 
famy and  the  measure  of  his  crime.  For  his  thrift  many  have 
been  made  poor.  Let  no  such  men  talk  of  rights.  Their  only 
shelter  must  be  Law,  and  that  shall  not  long  be  a refuge.  They 
have  appealed  to  Caesar,  and* to  Caesar  they  shall  go. 


36 


SUPPRESSION  OF  THE  LIQUOR  TRAFFIC. 


The  Traffic  as  Connected  with  Inn-keeping. 

■ One  of  tlie  strongest  intrenchments  which  this  traffic  has 
reared  for  itself  is  found  in  the  force  of  Custom.  Usages  which 
grew  up  in  the  Alcoholic  ages,  and  won  the  thirsty  generations 
of  our  fixthers  to  adopt  them,  have  come  down  to  us  venerahle 
v'ith  age,  and  with  almost  the  force  of  law.  Viewed  in  tho 
light  which  now  shines  on  them,  they  may  be  grossly  unwise 
and  pernicious  ; and  yet  they  hold  their  ground.  They  may 
stand  on  no  pretense  of  intrinsic  fitness  and  utility,  but  simply 
on  the  ground  of  immemorial  use  and  the  authority  of  custom; 
and  still  to  question  their  propriety  may  even  yet  startle  many 
minds  as  a rash  step. 

In  just  this  way  it  has  come  to  be  almost  universally  regard- 
ed as  essential  to  the  being  of  an  Inn,  that  it  should  be  fitted 
out  with  all  the  variety  of  intoxicating  drinks.  In  the  popu- 
lar notion  of  it,  one  of  the  chief  purposes  of  a Tavern  is  that 
it  be  a convenient  and  respectable  place  for  drinking.  '1  he 
prominent  feature  is  the  Bar.  Remove  that,  and  in  popular 
estimation  the  Tavern  is  gone. 

Now  we  deny  wholly  the  justness  of  this  conception.  V'e 
deny  that  there  is,  by  either  necessity  or  pro^xriety,  any  such 
bond  of  connection  between  the  traffic  in  drinks  and  the  busi- 
ness of  Inn-keeping.  It  is  no  part  of  the  appropriate  functions 
of  that  calling  to  deal  in  liquors.  A Tavern  is  not,  in  the  na- 
ture and  fitness  of  things,  a grog-house,  nor  is  a taverner  in- 
herently a tapster.  The  two  things  are  so  far  from  being 
identical,  that  they  are  even  antagonists ; their  union  is  incon- 
sistent and  disastrous,  and  ought  to  be  at  once  prohibited  by 
Law.  And  if  to  any  one  this  proposition  seems  starthng,  let 
him  suspend  his  judgment  and  refiect  a httle. 

There  is  a large  variety  of  establishments  passing  under  the 
name  of  taverns.  At  one  end  of  the  fist  you  have  the  genuins 
Inn,  busied  wdth  its  own  appropriate  work  of  public  accom- 
modation. Of  such  establishments  the  demand  wifi  create  and 
sustain  a sujxply.  The  traffic  in  drinks  is  an  impertinence  and 
an  incumbrance  to  their  real  business,  a pernicious  and  need- 
less expedient  for  swelling  gains  already  sufficient.  Below 
these  you  have  an  innumerable  host  of  grog-houses,  swarming 
on  all  highways  and  bytvays,  of  all  grades  shade  uuperceived 


SUPPKESSIOlsr  OF  THE  LIQUOB  TRAFFIC. 


37 


fitill  softening  into  shade,”  including  at  the  nether  extrema 
many  of  our  barest  dram-shops — all  dignified  v/ith  the  name 
of  taverns!  They  vary. in  their  character  according  to  the 
prominence  given  to  the  drinking  department.  Some  of  them 
are  taverns  kept  in  grog-shops,  others  are  grog-shops  kept  in 
Caverns.  They  are  for  the  most  part  in  the  management  of 
men  vdio  can  afibrd  to  defy  the  opinions  of  mankind,  and  stoop 
without  a blush  to  pick  a livelihood  from  the  pockets  of  sots, 
A churlish  and  hard-hearted  generation  of  publicans  have  thus 
stolen  into  their  hands  the  whole  class  of  third  and  fourth-rato 
Inns,  and  perverted  them  into  the  worst  of  dram-shops 
Under  the  abused  name  of  taverns,  what  a multitude  of  such 
dens  of  ruin  are  swarming  all  over  our  State ! The  travelef 
feels  instinctively,  as  he  approaches  them,  that  he  has  entereO 
on  the  scene  of  many  woes.  The  very  air  seems  laden  with 
sighs.  Desolation  sits  throned  on  the  leaning  sign-post,  and 
covers  the  sad  scene  with  the  spirit  of  his  presence ; while 
doleful  creatures  are  hovering  around,  grim  shapes  of  ruined 
ones  haunting  the  spot  where  they  fell. 

This  union  of  the  Traffic  with  a useful  calling,  and  the  con- 
ception of  it  as  a necessary  union,  are  of  such  practical  impor- 
tance as  to  justify  a careful  consideration  in  the  view  we  are 
now  taking.  Intemperance  has  fastened  no  other  abuse  on  a 
deluded  world  so  strange  as  the  perversion  of  the  Tavern  sys- 
tem into  a universal  agency  for  the  ministration  of  drinks. 
It  is  at  this  point  we  are  yielding  the  most  infatuated  and 
efiectual  suppoi't  to  the  Traffic.  And  here  is  one  of  the  master- 
strokes of  Satanic  wit,  to  mask  this  traffic  in  its  most  energetic 
form  under  cover  of  such  a business  as  inn-keeping,  and  then 
intrench  the  devilish  injunction  so  firmly  in  the  popular  delu- 
sion, that  while  all  other  modes  of  this  traffic  attract  attention 
and  assault,  this  still  sits  secure  and  defies  reformation.  With 
wiOing  blindness  men  still  acquiesce  in  and  continue  the  gross 
usurpation,  by  conceding  practically  that  a tavern  is,  of  course, 
and  must  be,  a drink-house. 

1.  Now  let  it  be  considered  how  utterly  inconsistent,  in  its 
tendencies  and  actual  operation,  the  business  of  dram-selling 
is  with  every  genuine  purpose  of  an  Inn.  Every  appropriate 
bud  of  such  an  establishment  is  marred,  if  not  wholly  defeated. 


38 


SUPPEESSION  OF  THE  LIQHOE  TEAFFIC 


by  connecting  with  it  this  business  of  pandering  to  the  lowest 
appetites,  and  exciting  the  worst  passions  that  disgrace  the 
species.  Look  at  any  legitimate  design  of  a tavern.  Is  it  in- 
tended for  the  accommodation  of  the  neighboring  public  on 
occasions  of  business  and  general  concourse?  ' But  if  on  such 
occasions  we  would  secure  the  trustiest  discharge  of  public 
business — if  we  would  provide  for  peace  and  decorum  among 
large  and  promiscuous  assemblies — if  we  would  not  have  noise 
and  riot,  brawling  and  violence,  banish  from  the  public  house 
the  temptations  and  facilities  of  drunken  excitement.  Is  it 
iesigned,  furthermore,  for  the  accommodation  of  travelers,  to 
provide  for  them  a temporary  home,  and  minister  to  their 
necessities?  Then  how  preposterous  to  convert  their  home 
into  a tippling-house,  and  render  it  the  favorite  resort  of  the 
idle,  the  impertinent,  and  the  boisterous — to  defeat,  just  so  far 
as  this  business  prevails,  the  whole  design  of  accommodating 
travelers  ! Two  occupations  are  thus  conjoined  under  the  same 
roof  and  in  the  same  person,  which  are  every  way  antagonist 
to  each  other.  The  ends  of  the  one  must  be  saciliced,  just  so 
far  as  those  of  the  other  are  attained.  Both  can  not  flourish. 
There  can  not  be  a good  tavern  which  is  also  a prosj^erous 
grog-shop.  The  one  implies  peace,  quiet,  neatness,  an  orderly 
and  ready  ministration  to  the  wants  of  the  wayfaring ; whOe 
the  whole  tendency  and  inevitable  operation  of  the  5ther,  if 
carried  on  with  any  success,  is  to  produce  a scene  of  disgust- 
ing filth,  confusion,  and  disquiet,  not  twice  to  be  wUlingly 
entered  by  the  decent.  That  this  is  a sore  evil  and  a glaring 
inconsistency,  I appeal  to  every  reader  who  has  had  occasion 
to  endure  the  accommodations  of  our  common  inns  about  the 
country.  The  last  place  on  earth  in  which  this  traflic  in  the 
means  of  disorder  and  annoyance  should  be  allowed,  is  the 
place  to  which  we  send  the  weary  and  way-worn  for  quiet  and 
refresliment. 

And  see  how  amply  the  public  accommodation  in  this  sort 
is  provided  for ! Along  our  public  ways,  often  at  every  mile 
or  tA\o,  a suspicious-looking  house  with  an  importunate  sign 
thrusts  itself  on  the  public  notice,  and  begs  a weary  world  to 
allow  itself  to  be  refreshed ! But  the  luckless  wayfarer  who  is 
enticed  to  enter,  pays  for  his  temerity  by  finding  himselt 


SUPPEESSHN  OF  THE  LIQUOE  TEAFPIC.  39 

deemed  and  provided  for  as  a tippler.  And  who  will  pretend 
that  one-half  of  these  so-called  inns  are  needed  for  public  con 
Venience,  or  that  they  derive  more  than  a fraction  of  theii 
support  from  the  appropriate  business  of  an  inn?  Multitudes 
of  them  neither  receive,  nor  from  their  situation  and  character 
could  be  expected  to  receive,  more  than  a casual  and  meagre 
patronage  as  houses  of  public  accommodation  in  any  proper 
sense  whatever.  They  are  a dead  weight  on  society — they 
are  sustained  at  an  immense  public  charge — and  they  inflict 
on  the  community  the  direst  mischiefs  in  return.  They  are 
not  Inns ; they  are  drink-shops  in  that  disguise,  licensed  in  a 
false  name  and  on  false  pretenses,  and  designed  as  the  con- 
venient resort  of  a wretched  constituency  of  neighboring  sots. 

Such  are  more  than  half  the  taverns  in  this  State,  as  any 
traveler  of  sutBcient  temerity  may  learn.  Instead  of  being  an 
advantage  to  the  public  or  to  the  community  in  which  they 
are  located,  they  are  at  once  a disgrace  and  a curse  to  their 
neighborhood.  Each  is  a center  of  wide-spread  debauchery 
and  decay. 

2.  The  practical  difSculty  will,  in  many  places,  be  found  to 
lie  here:  “Our  tavern,”  it  will  be  said,  “ can  not  sustain  itself 
on  the  mere  tavern-business  of  the  place.  It  will  fail,  if  we 
deny  it  this  other  source  of  profit  from  the  sale  of  drinks. 
But  we  must  have  a tavei-n — therefore  we  must  concede  it 
the  privilege  of  rum-selling.” 

It  were  a thousand-fold  cheaper,  then,  to  raise  by  tax  and 
pay  over  to  such  an  establishment  in  regular  installments,  from 
year  to  year,  the  balance  of  a fair  support,  rather  tlian  to  make 
it  a nursery  of  vice,  and  suffer 'it  to  support  itself  by  deprav- 
ing the  morals  and  preying  on  the  thrift  of  the  community. 
In  the  other  case  you  say  to  the  man,  “ Keep  us  here  a tavern 
■—get  what  you  can  from  it  as  a tavern — and  for  the'  rest,  keep 
drinks,  teach  our  neighbors  and  sons  to  love  them,  and  they’ll 
pay  jmu  the  balance ! ” Such  is  the  virtual  compact  on  which 
many  a tavern  is  opened.  Pass  on  now  a dozen  years,  and 
count  the  advantages  of  this  economical  scheme.  It  is  less 
of  a tavern  now  than  at  first,  but  it  is  a very  public  house. 
At  first  it  found  little  help  from  the  bar ; such  were  the 
general  virtue  and  correct  habits  of  the  neighborhood,  that  it 


^0 


SUPPEESSION  OF  THE  LIQTJOE  TRAFFIC. 


yielded  small  gains  for  a time.  But  a beginning  was  madt\ 
Your  neighbor  A has  paid  a trifle  there,  and  B sometimef 
drops  in,  and  C just  takes  a drop»  The  work  is  well  begun 
Your  sou  has  learned  the  way  there.  A growing  thirstinesg 
is  among  you.  Loose  habits  gain  ground,  indolence  prevailSj 
and  strange  medicines  have  come  into  vogue.  And  so,  year 
by  year,  the  poison  works  ever  deeper  and  wider.  And  now, 
ten  or  fifteen  years  being  past,  balance  your  accounts  with 
this  cheap  tavern.  That  fine  young  fellow  then,  rich  in 
liealth  and  character  and  homestead — that  is  he,  the  ragged 
bully  yonder,  lounging  at  the  tavern  steps  in  the  capacity  of 
deputy  hostler ! His  wife  and  children  are  in  yonder  hovel. 
These  have  been  terrible  years  to  her  and  to  him.  Infinitely 
better  and  cheaper  for  him  if  years  ago,  when  he  first  entered 
that  tavern,  he  had  laid  down  on  the  counter  a deed  of  his 
hundred  acres,  as  his  share  toward  sustaining  it  free  of  drink. 
And  where  is  jmur  neighbor  B,  that  man  of  office  and  leader 
of  men  ? Dead,  three  years  ago ; he  was  singularly  handled, 
had  wild  fits  of  fury  at  times,  and  saw  horrible  visions  of 
serpents  .and  devils — “ Inflammation  on  the  brain  ’’ — and  the 
town  paid  for  his  coffin!  And  his  aged  widow,  and  two  in- 
temperate sons,  and  the  sottish  widow  of  his  third  son,  who 
broke  his  neck  at  a raising,  and  her  five  children,  are  all 
counted  among  the  town  poor  ! That  man  was  worth  more 
than  many  taverns.  Insanity  has  prevailed  too.  Captain  C, 
one  evening  of  muster-day,  after  displaying  all  through  the 
duties  and  trials  of  the  day  as  much  sanity  as'  military  men 
in  general,  went  mad  at  night  and  butchered  his  wife  ! The 
State  supports  him  now,  the  town  his  six  orphans.  And 
what  a change  for  the  worse  all  over  the  place  ! It  is  not 
merely  so  many  fitllen,  so  manj'  bankrupt — not  merely  that 
many  of  your  old  acquaintances  are  sleeping  now  in  prema- 
ture and  shameful  graves — nor  oven  that  that  son,  who  took 
his  first  glass  in  that  tavern,  now  costs  you  thousands,  and 
wrings  your  heart  with  every  pang  which  a besotted  ami 
vagabond  child  can  inflict — but  alas  ! what  a loose  and  grace- 
less generation  has  sprung  up  ! What  indolence  and  mis- 
chief and  vice  abound  ! Poverty  fallen  thirty  per  cent.— 
moi’als  eighty  1 But  you  have  had  your  tavern.  You  have 


8ITPPKT:SSI0N  of  the  LIQXJOjR  TKAFFIC. 


41 


trio^  that  sagacious  expedient  for  sustaining  it,  not  by  put- 
ting your  own  liand  in  your  pocket  and  paying  what  it  was 
worth,  but  by  letting  tlie  dealer  put  his  hand  in  and  help 
himself — and  not  int"'  your  pockets  only,  but  into  tlie  heaTts 
and  characters  and  lives  ot  you  all  ! You  have  paid  him  out 
Sf  the  best  blood  of  your  hearts. 

?..  But  a still  more  important  consideration  remains.  By 
lliis  pervei'se  and  unnatural  union,  the  whole  tavern  system 
is  surremlered  into  the  hands  of  the  enemy,  and  becomes  a 
legalized  and  efficient  agency  for  the  continuance  and  exten- 
sion of  intemperance.  Here  and  there  at  suitable  points  over 
the  country.  Inns  are  needed ; and  this  necessity  is  made  di- 
rectlj'’  subservient  to  the  nurture  and  patronage  of  vice,  by 
^fastening  to  these  useful  establishments  the  i^ernicious  system 
of  dram-selling.  The  Traffic  is  allowed  to  seize  upon  them 
and  appropriate  them  to  its  own  use.  At  these  places  of 
most  public  I'esort  are  stored  up  and  displayed  the  tempta- 
tions and  facilities  of  indulgence,  and  the  work  of  seduction 
is  carried  on  at  every  advantage  and  on  the  broadest  scale. 
They  constitute  a favored  class  of  dram-shops,  for  on  their 
premises  depraved  appetite  may  sate  itself  without  restric- 
tion. Secure  fi'ora  responsibility,  they  smite  indiscriminately 
among  the  multitude  with  the  keenest  weapon  of  death. 
Theirs  is  a dagger  that  kills  not  here  and  now,  but  hides  its 
deep  wound  in  the  heart,  and  sends  its  victim  elsewhere  for  a 
grave.  They  kindle  and  nurse  the  appetite  that  finds  in  other 
scenes  its  miserable  maturity.  The  transient  tippler  who 
finishes  his  course  with  delirium  in  some  loathsome  cell  in  a 
distant  city,  has  for  years  been  imbibing  that  periiition  per 
haps  in  half  the  taverns  in  the  State  ; and  grinmng  in  fit 
demon  form  around  hi<i  dyuig  pillow  comes  the  unage  of 
saany  an  obliging  host  who  lent  him  a new  impmse  in  his 
eareer  of  ruin  ! Yet  hiding  himself  in  a crowd,  e.ao.h  dealei 
cries,  “Never  shake  thy  gory  locks  at  me  / thou  canst  no^ 
say /did  it!” 

Probably  more  is  done  to  perpetuate  intemperance  by  this 
form  of  the  Traffic,  as  connected  with  our  Inns,  than  by  all 
others  combined.  Consider  the  extent  of  this  agency,  ueituig 
the  whole  laud  with  its  snares,  and  everywhere  proffennv' 


42 


SUPPRESSION  OF  THE  LIQUOR  TRAFFIC. 


fatal  cup  Avith  all  the  seductions  which  ingenious  cupidity 
can  devise.  Look  at  the  factitious  respectability  which  it 
gains  by  its  connection  with  tlie  useful  and  honorable  busi- 
ness of  Inn-keeping.  It  is  a loatlisome  and  exhausting  ex- 
crescence on  that  business,  sharing  its  dignity  and  fed  on  its 
life-blood!  To  the  Traffic  as  connected  with  our  Inns  is 
mainly  assigned  the  more  delicate  task  of  inducting  men  into 
the  way  of  death — of  tempting  them  to  the  first  glass,  and 
nursing  the  fatal  appetite  through  its  first  stages.  Other 
modes  of  the  Traffic  shock  and  alarm  us  more,  not  because 
they  are  doing  a different  woi’k,  but  simply  because  they  are 
pushing  the  same  work  through  its  more  matured  and  dread- 
ful stages.  The  work  is  one ; and  the  service  rendered  in  it 
by  our  fashionable  hotels  is  more  imjiortant  than  any  other. 
Theirs  is  the  fundamental  work  of  decoying  the  victim.  And 
by  their  operation  the  demand  is  created  for  all  these  lower 
and  lowest  sinks  of  sottishness;  for  they  kindle  the  thirst 
which  drags  down  its  victim  from  step  to  step  through  every 
grade  of  infamy,  till  he  who  erewhile  was  quaffing  his  ivine 
in  these  first-class  hotels,  is  pitched  foilh  at  last  from  the 
meanest  cellar,  and  death  passes  the  work  by  a slight  tran- 
sition from  the  hands  of  the  dealers  to  the  hands  of  devils. 
The  whole  array  of  these  middling  and  worst  taverns,  beer- 
shops,  dram-cellars,  etc.,  are  but  the  necessary  appendages  to 
higher  Inns.  Yet  no  misery  is  seen  around  these ; none  of 
the  appalling  results  of  matured  intemperance  are  visible 
there ; and  so  our  eye  is  diverted  from  this  most  effective 
agency  of  the  enemy,  and  we  wage  an  almost  useless  war 
against  the  lower  shops,  where  Death  sits  openly  grinning 
over  his  feast,  and  defies  our  efforts. 

We  want  none  of  all  this  sort  of  taverns.  Where  the  pul> 
lie  need  requires  a real  Inn,  it  might  be  sustained  as  suck 
We  have  now  more  than  twice  as  many  as  are  needed  or  can 
be  sustained  as  taverns  simply,  and  therefore  they  are  de- 
graded into  drink-houses.  Now  let  these  inconsistent  callings 
of  the  inn-keeper  and  the  dram-vender  be  forever  separated. 
Give  us  only  real  taverns,  and  we  will  sustain  all  we  Avant. 

We  may  be  told  that  there  is  perfect  freedom  to  ojten  Tem- 
perance Taverns,  if  we  wish;  and  that  such  bouses  have 


6TTPPRESSION  OF  THE  LIQUOR  TEAITIC. 


43 


failed  often  enough  to  show  that  only  taverns  of  the  old 
stamp  can  he  sustained.  This  appears  jdausihle,  hut  a little 
thouglit  will  show  it  to  oe  an  entire  fallacy.  Temperance 
houses,  that  is,  Taverns  sti-ictly,  have  often  and  perhaps  gen- 
erally proved  failures.  Why?  Partly  heeause  they  have  not 
met  with  that  ready  and  generous  support  from  the  friends 
of  Temperance  which  they  had  reason  to  expect ; paaly  be- 
cause they  have  not  been  opened  at  eligible  points,  but  at 
third  and  fourth-rate  locations;  but  more  than  for  all  other 
reasons,  because  of  the  multitude  of  rum-selling  establish- 
ments, facetiously  styled  Taverns  by  the  Authorities,  swarm- 
ing at  all  corners,  sustained  in  very  small  part  by  the  rea» 
business  of  a tavern,  the  balance  derived  from  dram-selling ; 
these  mongrel  establishments  divide  up  the  appropriate  inn- 
custom  into  shares  so  small,  that  no  tavern,  as  such,  can  live 
on  it.  A Temperance  house,  on  the  same  spot  where  one  of 
these  could  thrive,  fails  of  course  ; not  because  it  does  not. 
better  answer  all  the  real  purposes  of  a Tavern,  but  simply 
because,  with  the  scanty  dividend  of  aiipropriate  patronage 
which  falls  to  its  share,  it  will  not  eke  out  a support  by  strik- 
ing hands  with  death  and  pocketing  the  price  of  blood. 

It  may  also  be  said  that  there  may  be  and  are  establish- 
ments that  meet  every  reasonable  expectation  as  Inns,  and 
yet  retain  the  sale  of  diinks.  It  may  be  ; but  such  instances 
upon  examination  will  furnish  us  the  clearest  proof  of  the 
irreconcilable  incongruity  of  the  two  employments.  For  one 
of  these  two  things  will  be  found  true  of  every  such  respect- 
able exception  to  the  ordinary  vileness  of  grog-vendimr  tav- 
erns : either  its  keeper  is  a man  who  carries  on  a strenuous 
and  continual  contest  against  all  the  legitimate  tendencies  of 
the  Traffic,  and  thus  by  beating  back  the  evil,  maintains,  in 
spite  of  it,  a decent  house  ; or  he  has  sunk  the  drink-depart- 
ment almost  to  nothing,  withdrawn  his  bar,  hidden  it  from 
Bight,  and  virtually  discontinued  the  sale.  In  either  case  we 
have  ^that  most  convincing  testimony  which  a reluctant  wit- 
ness yields  against  himself,  that  an  irreconcilable  antagonism 
exists  between  the  traffic  in  alcoholic  drinks  and  all  the  true 
ends  of  a tavern. 

We  have  dwelt  at  such  length  on  the  Traffic  in  ^is  conneo 


SUPPRESSIOIT  OF  THE  LIQrOE  TRAFFIC. 


tion,  because  just  here  we  are  still  making  the  most  pregnant 
concession  to  Intemperance.  At  a time  when  entertainment 
and  accommodation  were  synonymous  with  diink,  it  is  not 
strange  that  a Taverner  came  to  be  regarded  as,  ex-officio^  a 
vender  of  this  epitome  of  all  comforts.  In  such  times  grew 
up  the  notion  that,  in  the  nature  of  things,  a Tavern  is  a 
dram-shop  with  a bedroom  and  barn  appended  ; and  its  keeptcr 
a man  cunning  in  the  concoction  of  drinks,  who  incidentally 
also  provides  food  and  rest,  such  rest  as  can  be  had  in  the 
purlieus  of  a dram-shop.  And  to  this  day  that  is  the  preva- 
lent conception  of  a Tavern— the  bar-room,  as  the  central 
idea,  to  which  are  added,  by-the-by,  certain  appendages  for 
the  accommodation  of  those  who  do  not  find  in  drink  a sum- 
mary supply  for  all  wants.  And  on  this  conception  our  laws 
are  framed.  In  a word,  there  is  no  point  at  which  this  reform 
has  made  so  little  impression  as  at  this;  and  any  intelligent 
movement  against  the  Traflic  must  include,  as  one  of  its  chief 
aims,  the  redemption  of  our  Tavern  system  from  this  strange 
abuse. 

Recent  Attempts  at  Legislation. 

But  we  have  already  entered  upon  this  last  stage  of  the 
Temperance  Reform.  For  several  years  past  our  work  has 
been  impelling  us  to  a more  direct  conflict  with  the  Traflic, 
and  in  several  of  our  States  this  decisive  battle  is  already 
begun. 

But  our  attempts  thus  far  have  only  been  introductory 
Assuredly  we  shall  not  rest  in  these  indirect  methods  of  legis- 
lation. It  has  doubtless  been  wise  to  approach  the  question 
of  Law  experimentally,  until  it  shall  have  matured  itself  in 
the  popular  mind.  And  no  plan  could  have  secured  this  so 
well  as  that  which  we  have  been  trying,  by  submitting  the 
fate  of  the  Traflic,  town  by  town,  to  the  suffrages  of  the  peo- 
ple. But  we  shall  have  far  other  Law  than  this.  Our  aim  ia 
to  secure  as  speedily  as  possible  direct  legislation  against  tlio 
Traflic  in  intoxicating  drinks,  as  against  other  pernicious  and 
criminal  practices.  We  shall  not  cease  to  demand  legislative 
action  until  this  work  of  temptation  and  destruction  is  di- 
rectly prohibited  under  severe  penalties.  Meantime  we  have 
. urged  this  scheme  of  local  and  popular  legislation  in  the  pri- 


erypRESsioN  of  the  liquor  traffic. 


45 


mfiry  assemblies  of  tlie  people  only  as  an  initiative.  It  is  a 
very  imperfect  measure,  but  its  excellence  for  the  time  lay  in 
its  imperfection.  We  should  not  tolerate  such  a mode  of 
legislation  against  theft,  nor  shall  we  long  tolerate  it  in  this 
•case. 

Jbit  have  nut  all  our  attempts  in  tliis  direction  failed  ? Very 
fer  from  it.  And  if  any  are  disheartened  by  recent  apparent 
reverses,  we  would  ask  of  tnem  a careful  consideration  of  the 
following  thoughts. 

In  the  nature  of  the  case,  so  wide  a change  in  legislation  as 
this  is,  from  favoi'ing  to  repressing  the  Traffic  in  drinks,  must 
be  attended  for  a season  with  popular  revulsions.  There  will 
be  a period  of  fluctuation.  This  should  have  been  anticipated 
by  us  from  the  first.  As  yet  the  people  know  not  fully  what 
they  mean  in  this  matter.  The  real  intent  and  purposes  of 
this  State  is  that  there  will  be  Law  against  the  Traffic,  and 
that  will  at  length  be -the  result.  Meanwhile  the  wish  of  the 
people  has  not  yet  clearly  become  their  will.  Unstable  souls 
are  shaken  from  side  to  side.  Tlie  popular  voice  is  uncertain 
All  this  is  but  natural.  It  is  only  the  beginning  of  the  end 
and  should  create  no  alarm.  This  cause  has  been  inured  from 
its  infancy  to  popular  clamor.  In  the  midst  of  just  such  agi- 
tation and  storiuful  debate  it  has  won  its  triumphs ; and  now 
that  it  has  reached  a hardy  and  vigorous  maturity,  we  need 
not  fear  to  trust  it  once  more  to  wind  and  wave.  For  a time 
it  will  meet  with  a doubtful  reception,  and  with  temporary 
rejection ; but  it  will  return  again  like  the  stronger  flow  of 
obstructed  waters,  sweeping  all  obstacles  before  it.  The 
question  has  gone  down  to  work  itself  out  among  the  people, 
and  ere  long  it  will  emerge  in  the  shape  of  an  imperative  and 
undeniable  popular  demand  for  prohibitory  Law  against  this 
traffic. 

There  is  need  among  us  of  a more  philosophic  composure  ir 
view  of  these  temjjorary  checks.  We  should  mingle  with  our 
wishes  more  of  hopeful  trust  in  the  strength  of  great  princi- 
ples. Let  us  watch  with  confidence  the  process  by  which  tho 
great  exj^eriment  is  wrought  out,  possessing  our  souls  in  pa- 
tience as  well  as  in  zeal,  sure  that  what  men  may  call  defeat, 
by  God’s  favor  hides  in  it  blessing  and  a victory. 


t6  SUPPRESSION  OF  THE  LIQUOR  TRAFFIC. 

It  is  not  now  as  it  has  been  in  years  past,  when  the  Tem2)erance 
sentiment  was  mainly  operative  in  other  directions,  and  conscious 
of  weakness  submitted  to  legislation  which  it  could  not  avert.  All 
parties  have  felt  at  liberty,  in  time  past,  to  treat  it  with  contempt 
and  opposition,  for  it  could  i^e  done  mtli  impunity.  Kow  it  has 
gained  strength ; and  though  it  is  the  creature  of  no  party,  cwidg 
allegiance  to  none,  and  connecting  itself  with  no  party  as  such,  it 
has  nevertheless  become  a most  influential  element  in  the  political 
world.  The  demand  comes  up  more  and  more  loudly  from  the 
heart  of  the  people,  for  protection  against  the  intolerable  ravages  of 
the  Spirit-tratfic,  for  legal  restraints  on  a source  of  wo,  penury,  and 
crime  surpassing  all  others,  and  wdiich  no-  moral  means  can  reach. 
It  is  rising,  still  rising,  already  passing  into  the  ascendant,  already 
having  power  to  pull  down  and  to  set  up.  What  they  shall  do  with 
it — what  it  will  do  with  them — are  questions  of  deep  interest  to 
those  who  at  this  crisis  have  place  and  pow’er  in  the  State.  Will 
they  consult  for  the  right,  or  yield  to  the  clamors  of  the  thirsty  ? 
Will  they  listen  to  the  voice  from  above,  or  to  the  voices  from  be- 
neath ? To  venture  now  on  an  esjsousal  of  the  doomed  traSic  would 
be  to  share  henceforth  its  falling  fortunes.  We  do  not  anticipate 
an  act  of  such  blind  infatuation  on  the  part  of  any  party.  There  is 
prudence  enough  to  count  the  cost  of  such  a step. 

There  is  yet  another  consideration  which  has  not  been  sufiiciently 
weighed,  and  which  will  be  still  more  needful  in  the  future.  Thera 
is  an  inherent  impossibility  that  new  Law  should  at  once  have  aU  Che 
force  and  easy  applicability  of  that  which  is  old.  The  conditions  of 
the  case  forbid  the  perfect  immediate  operation  of  a recent  statutu 
in  a matter  like  this.  And  we  call  on  all  who  are  desirous  of  better 
Laws,  to  forearm  themselves  with  considerate  anticipations  as  to  the 
immediate  working  of  even  a perfect  Law,  when  we  get  it.  The  de- 
mand seems  to  have  been,  that  in  this  transition  state  of  the  popular 
mind,  when  it  has  indeed  made  itself  up  prevalenth,  but  only  par- 
tially, in  iavor  of  restrictive  Law — while  as  yet  old  prejudices,  cus- 
toms, and  appetite  conspire  mightily  against  it,  and  the  ne'wness  cf 
the  Law  forbids  it  those  supports  of  age,  authority,  and  usage  cn 
which  the  efiiciency  of  the  Laws  so  largely  dej^end — that  a roer-nt 
statute,  amid  all  these  obstructions,  should  go  at  once  into  smoctli 
and  easy  and  universal  operation  ! There  shall  be  no  fair  trial-time, 
no  day  of  grace,  no  considerate  allowance  for  the  peculiarities  of  the 
case.  Away  with  it  if  in  one  twelvemonth  it  do  not  show  all  the 
energy  and  authority  of  a Law  of  a hundred  years’  growth  against  a 
crime  universally  reprobated  ! The  absurdity  of  such  an  expectation 
is  apparent  on  the  slightest  reflection.  And  yet  it  is  quite  a cominco 


SUPPRESSION  OF  THE  LIQUOR  TRAFFIC. 


47 


impression  that,  only  once  get  right  Law,  it  will  immediately  ba 
capable  of  complete  ai:»plication. 

Suppose  now  that  instead  of  possessing  a clear  and  long-settled 
character  as  a crime,  theft  liad  all  along  been  licensed,  defended  by 
many  as  a natural  right,  and  practiced  with  impunity.  An  opiiosiiig 
Bcntiment  springs  nj),  and  linally  turns  the  drift  against  it.  Still  it 
iiolds  ground,  and  jnultitudes  claim  it  as  an  inalienable  and  consti- 
tutional privilege  to  steal.  In  short,  let  it  stand  just  where  this 
equal  erime  of  drunkard-making  now  stands.  Who  does  not  see 
that  to  obtain  and  enforce  Law  against  theft  would  in  that  case  bo 
for  a time  as  difficult  and  delicate  a matter  as  we  find  this  ? 

This  impatience  therefore  is  utterly  unreasonable.  It  demands  an 
impossibility.  It  overlooks  all  the  conditions  of  force  and  authority 
in  Law.  An  immense  friction  is  to  be  overeome  by  any  new  statute 
in  an  unwonted  direction,  before  it  can  have  full  force  and  easy  ap- 
plicability— a friction  which  in  some  cases  of  reformatory  Law  may 
for  a time  almost  forbid  its  present  motion.  This  is  inevitable  and 
must  be  endured.  Let  righteous  Law  have  its  plaee  on  the  Statue- 
book.  It  will  be  much  that  it  stands  there.  For  there  is  a power 
in  right  Law  beyond  its  immediate  availability.  Like  wisdom,  it 
standeth  in  the  top  of  high  places,  and  its  voice  is  to  the  sons  of 
men.  Law  is  itself  one  of  our  highest  moral  means,  and  has  an 
edueative  influence  on  the  poirular  mind  and  heart.  Let  there  bo 
right  Law,  therefore,  and  we  will  ap2rly  and  enforce  it  as  we  can. 
Its  restrictive  energies  will  more  and  more  develojr  themselves  ; and 
the  time  is  not  distant  when  no  Law  will  have  easier  operation  than 
this. 

It  only  remains  tc  consider  now  the  plausible  objeetion,  that  while 
the  popular  mind  is  yet  so  divided  and  unsettled,  it  is  iiremature  to 
demand  legislation.  Wait,  we  are  told,  till  you  are  strong  enough 
to  carry  and  keeii  a perfect  Law.  Wait  till  this  moral  want  shall 
have  become  the  undoubted  will  of  the  people,  and  they  shall  have 
made  up  their  minds  so  clearly  that  there  shall  be  none  of  this 
fluctuation  and  jiainful  uncertainty. 

We  must  decline  such  counsel.  We  can  not  wait — we  ought  not 
to  wait — and  it  would  be  ruinous  to  attempt  it.  We  can  not,  for  as 
by  a Divine  impulse  the  Temjierance  sentiment  is  already  every- 
where assuming  the  shajie  of  a struggle  for  Law  against  the  Traffic. 
We  have  reached  that  stage  of  this  Reform.  The  irrogress  of  things 
has  brought  us  to  this  part  of  our  work.  It  is  in  vain  to  decline  it. 
The  crisis  has  come,  and  we  must  meet  it.  Nor  ought  we  to  wait. 
Such  is  the  character  of  this  traffic,  so  fully  is  it  now  known  to  b« 
the  fountain-head  of  all  the  evils  of  intemperance,  that  every  just 


$8 


BtTPPRESSIOX  OF  THE  LIQUOR  TRAFFIC. 


principle  and  every  right  emotion  impel  us  to  hold  no  terrr/s  with  ft 
but  (hose  of  resolved  and  utmost  opposition.  We  feel  it  a shamePal 
and  guilty  thing  that  Law  should  countenance  it,  that  it  should  not 
prohibit  it,  as  one  of  the  highest  crimes  among  men.  And  we  must 
clear  our  souls  of  the  guilt  of  it  by  seizing  the  first  moment  of  our 
r.bility  1o  turn  Law  as  decidedly  as  possible  against  it.  And  we 
gain  nothing  by  postponing  the  struggle.  To  -^iiiit  until  the  work 
of  right  legislation  shall  be  easy,  will  be  to  wait  forever.  For  while 
we  delay,  the  Traffic  retains  its  activity  and  holds  us  back.  We 
rhall  gain  little  increase  of  strength  while  it  remains  in  unimpaired 
operation.  Defer  the  struggle  long  as  we  may,  there  will  still  Ira 
the  same  intrinsic  difficulty  from  the  novelty  of  Law  and  the  fiuo- 
tuations  of  popular  feeling ; and  equal  incidental  obstructions  would 
still  embarrass  the  undertaking. 

We  are  not  premature,  then,  in  our  demand  for  righteous  Law. 
We  know  it  is  an  arduous  struggle,  but  it  must  be  made,  and  our 
strength  will  not  be  relatively  increased  by  delay.  The  public  mind 
will  ne^  er  make  itself  up  for  Law  until  it  is  put  resolutely  to  it  as  a 
present  question.  We  have  been  able  to  begin  the  work  in  this 
direction,  and  we  are  able  to  carry  it  forward.  We  are  ripe  for  i 
movement  in  advance,  and  it  would  be  neither  wise  nor  right  to  ds- 
fer  it  if  we  could — uor  have  we  the  jDower  to  defer  it  if  we  would 
It  is  begun,  and  we  can  not  look  back. 


THE  THRONE  OF  INIQUITY. 

BY  KEY.  ALBERT  BARNES. 


• BUall  the  throne  of  iniquity  have  fellowship  with  thee,  which  frameth  mischlel 
by  a law?” — Psalm  xciv.  20. 

“THRONE  of  iniquity”  is  a throne  or  government 
that  is  founded  on  iniquity,  or  that  sustains  iniquity. 
Such  a throne  or  government  “frames  mischief  by  a 
law  ” when  by  its  laws  it  protects  or  patronizes  that 
which  is  evil,  or  when  those  who  practise  evil  may 
plead  that  what  they  do  is  legal,  and  may  take  refuge  under  the 
laws  of  the  land.  Such  a throne  of  government,  the  Psalmist 
says,  can  have  no  fellowship  with  God.  H’S  throne  is  a throne 
of  righteousness.  He  makes  no  law  to  protect  or  to  regulate 
evil.  His  laws,  in  relation  to  all  that  is  wrong,  only  prohibit 
and  condemn.  They  who  practise  iniquity  iu  any  form  c.aa 
never  take  refuge  under  his  statutes;  can  never  claim  that  what 
they  do  is  legal  under  his  administration  ; can  never  plead  the 
patronage  of  his  government  ; can  never  appeal  to  the  sanction 
of  nis  laws  against  those  moral  influences  which  may  be  employ- 
ed to  induce  them  to  abandon  their  course  of  life  or  the  business 
in  wuich  they  are  engaged. 

A iaw  framed  to  vrotect  evil  is  a method  of  framing  mischief 
by  a law.  A law  which  assumes  that  a thing  is  wrong,  and  yet 
tolerates  it ; which  attempts  only  to  check  and  regulate  it,  with- 
out utterly  prohibiting  it ; which  aims  to  derive  a revenue  from 
it  for  tnc  purpose  of  government;  which  makes  that  which  is 
morally  wjong  Icyal^  is  one  of  those  things  in  human  affairs  with 
which  the  throne  of  God  can  have  no  fellowship.  A law,  foi 
instance,  wnich  should  assume  that  lotteries  are  evil,  and  are  of 
pernicious  tendency  in  a community,  and  which  should  neverthe- 
less authorize  them,  and  seek  to  derive  a revenue  from  them, 
though  under  any  restrictions,  would  be  such  a form  of  “framing 
mischief  by  law”  as  could  have  no  “fellowship”  with  the 
“throne  of  God.”  The  same  would  be  true  of  gaming  establish- 
ments ; and  the  same  must  be  true  of  all  acknowledged  forms  of 
iniquity. 


4 


THE  THRONE  OF  INIQUITY. 


An  evil  always  becomes  icorse  by  being  sustained  by  the  lawe 
of  the  laud.  It  is  much  to  have  the  sanction  of  law  and  the 
moral  force  of  law  in  favor  of  any  course  of  human  conduct.  In 
tlie  estimation  of  many  persons,  to  make  a thing  legal  is  to  make 
it  morally  right,  and  an  employment  which  is  legal  is  jiursuedby 
them  with  few  rebukes  of  conscience,  and  with  little  disturbance 
from  any  reference  to  a higher  than  human  authority.  Moreover, 
this  fact  does  much  to  deter  others  from  opposing  the  evil,  and 
from  endeavoring  to  tui'P  the  public  indignation  against  it.  It  is 
an  unwelcome  thing  for  a good  man  ever  to  set  himself  against 
the  laws  of  the  land,  and  to  denounce  that  as  wrong  which  they 
affirm  to  be  right.  It  is  a virtue  to  be  law-loving  and  law-abid- 
ing; and  it  is  a principle  which  every  gooi  citizen  cherishes  to 
do  what  he  can  to  give  additions,!  force  to  the  authority  of  law, 
and  not  to  lend  the  sanction. of  his  name  to  that  which  would 
weaken  its  moral  power.  Hence  r-uch  men  are  often  slow  and 
reluctant  in  attacking  that  which  an  undoubted  evil,  for  the 
attack  seems  to  be  made  upon  the  legal  fabric  as  such,  and  to 
do  just  so  much  to  weaken  the  authority  ot  law.  The  good  are 
deterred  from  opposing  it,  for  they  dc-  not  wish  to  seem  to  be 
arrayed  against  the  laws.  The  bad  are  co»'ilrnied  in  their  course, 
for  they  feel  that  they  are  sustained  by  the  Vws  of  the  land,  and 
for  them  that  is  enough.  They  can  claim  *00,  some  popular 
sympathy  when  they  are  denounced  for  doine  that  which  islegal. 
They  can  pursue  their  course  in  spite  of  all  H'at  others  can  do. 
Thus  the  evil  grows  in  strength  by  all  the  boldness  given  to  them 
by  the  sanction  of  the  laws,  and  by  all  the  reluctance  of  the 
friends  of  reform  to  denounce  that  as  wrong  which  the  Jaw  affirms 
to  be  right. 

The  same  thing  is  true,  when  there  is  an  attempt,  nrt  directly 
to  sustain  and  countenance  the  evil  as  such,  but  to  regulaU  it  God 
never  does  this  in  his  government;  for  his  law  lends  no  sanction 
to  that  which  is  wrong,  does  nothing  to  regulate  it,  has  no  pro 
visions  for  deriving  a benefit  from  it.  It  prohibits  and  condemns- 
and  that  is  all.  But  much  is  done  to  countenance  evil  when  th> 
law  seeks  to  regulate  it ; to  check  it,  but  not  to  remove  it ; to  tas 
it  ; tc  derive  a revenue  from  it  ; and  to  make  supplemental 
provisions  for  the  mischiefs  which  grow  up  under  its  own  enact- 
ments. 

The  laws  in  relation  to  the  traffic  in  intoxicating  drinks  in  this 
country  have  been,  in  the  main,  enacted  on  the  principles  just 
alluded  to.  The  traffic  has  been  admitted  to  be  so  full  of  peril 


THE  THRONE  OF  INIQUITY, 


8 


that  it  needed  to  be  checked  and  regulated,  and  the  laws  hava 
been  made  on  the  supposition  that  it  could  not  be  thrown  open 
indiscriminately  to  all  classes  of  citizens.  Hence,  it  has  been 
supposed  that  a special  permission  or  license''  was  necessary  in 
order  to  guard  the  traffic,  and  that  not  a license,  as  in  the  case 
of  dry  goods  and  tin-ware,  on  the  sole  ground  of  raising  a 
revenue,  but  on  the  ground  that  it  was  dangerous,  and  that, 
therefore,  it  should  be  entrusted  only  to  those  in  whom  the  com- 
munity could  confide,  with  the  additional  idea  that  the  state  had 
a right  to  raise  a revenue  from  it,  as  a compensation  for  the  pro- 
tection extended  to  it.  In  our  country,  it  has  never  been  assumed 
to  be  safe  and  proper  that  the  business  should  be  thrown  open  to 
any  and  all  who  might  choose  to  engage  in  it,  as  any  persons  who 
choose  and  as  many  as  choose,  may  engage  in  the  business  of  farm- 
ing or  gardening ; of  making  hats,  or  shoes,  or  coffins ; of  build- 
ing houses,  or  manufacturing  ploughs  or  wagons.  It  is  assumed  in 
the  laws  that  it  is  to  be  a regulated  evil ; and  the  object  is  not  to 
prohibit  it,  but  first  to  keep  it  within  certain  bounds,  and  then 
to  provide  for  the  evils  which  grow  out  of  it  by  taxing  the 
virtuous  and  industrious  to  bear  the  expenses  of  the  crime  and 
pau23erism  which  it  was  anticipated  would  be  produced  in  spite 
of  all  the  precautions  of  the  state.  There  was  once  such  legis- 
lation about  lotteries;  there  has  been  such  in  some  countries 
about  licentiousness  ; but,  with  some  few  exceptions,  »t  is  be- 
lieved there  is  no  such  legislation  on  any  other  subject  now  in 
the  world. 

The  time  has  come  when  it  is  proper  to  enquire  whether  this  is 
the  true  principle  on  this  subject;  whether  a great  and  acknow- 
ledged evil  can  ever  be  suppressed  in  this  way;  or  whether  the 
traffic  should  be  wholly  prohibited  by  law,  accompanied  with 
suitable  penalties.  The  evils  of  intemperance  are  in  all  respects 
so  great,  and  are,  in  spite  of  all  the  legal  enactments  now  existing, 
BO  far  spread  and  spreading  in  the  land;  the  loss  to  the  nation  in 
its  moral  character  and  in  its  productive  industry  is  so  great; 
the  cost  of  prosecuting  for  crime  committed  under  the  influence 
of  intoxicating  drinks,  and  the  taxes  to  support  paupers  made  by 
intemperance,  are  so  great;  the  failure  of  the  appeals  made  by 
argument  and  moral  suasion  are,  in  painful  respects,  so  manifest ; 
the  woes  and  lamentations  caused  by  intemperance  come  uo  still 
BO  loud  and  so  piercing  from  all  parts  of  the  ffind ; the  ruin  of  the 
body  and  the  soul  of  a human  being  is  so  dreadful;  and  the  fact 
that  tens  of  thousands  of  our  countrymen  are  annually  sent  to  a 


8 


THB  THRONE  OF  INIQUITY. 


dishonored  grave  as  the  result  of  the  “ drinking  usages  ol 
society  ” — these  things  are  forcing  the  enquiry  upon  the  pub- 
lic mind  whether  it  is  or  is  not  proper  and  practicable  to  prohibit 
the  traffic  altogether,  and  whether  this  is  not  the  point  which 
legislation  must  reach,  and  should  reach,  in  regard  to  this  great 
evil. 

We,  who  are  assembled  here,  constitute  a part  of  the  commu- 
nity who,  through  our  representatives,  make  and  administer  the 
laws  of  the  land.  Those  laws  wall  be  always  in  our  country 
merely  the  exponent  of  public  opinion,  p-nd  the  nature  of  the  pub- 
lic opinion  will  find  an  expression  in  the  laws.  With  a view, 
therefore,  to  the  formation  of  a correct  public  opinion  as  far  as 
my  voice  may  have  any  influence,  and  ultimately  to  a change  in 
the  whole  course  of  legislation  on  this  subiect  in  our  common- 
wealth and  country,  and  imitating  the  example  of  that  great  man 
who  “ reasoned  ” on  temperance,  as  well  as  on  “ righteousness  and 
judgment  to  come  ” — the  one  closely  connected  wdth  the  others — 
(Acts  xxiv.  23),  I propose  to  submit  to  you  a tew  considerations 
on  the  propriety  of  a law  prohibiting  entirely,  wuth  suitable  pen- 
alties, the  traffic  in  intoxicating  liquors  as  a beverage.  For  so 
important  a proposed  change  in  legislation — a change  affecting 
the  business  of  so  large  a part  of  the  community,  and  so  much 
invested  capital,  and  reversing  the  maxims  so  long  regarded  as 
settled  on  the  subject  of  legislation — it  is  proper  tbatreasons  should 
be  submitted  to  an  intelligent  public.  Such  a change  is  not  to 
be  produced  by  mere  excitement,  still  less  by  denunciation.  ' Such 
a law  as  is  proposed  cannot  be  obtained  without  appros'ing  itself 
to  a reflecting  community ; such  a law,  if  obtained,  could  not  be 
enforced  unless  it  should  commend  itself  to  such  a community  as 
founded  on  just  principles  of  legislation.  I propose,  therefore, 
first,  to  lay  down  a few  principles  in  reference  to  legislation  as 
bearing  upon  public  evils,  and  then  to  enquire  into  their  applica- 
tion to  this  particular  case. 

We  have  not  now  the  point  to  argue  that  it  is  right  and  proper 
to  legislate  in  regard  to  this  trafllc.  That  point  is  acted,  on  by 
all  the  legislatures  in  the  laud,  and  is  acquiesced  in  by  the  people, 
ft  is  assumed  in  all  the  laws  which  pertain  to  the  importation  of 
spirituous  liquor  ; by  all  the  statutes  which  relate  to  “ licensing ’’ 
public-houses  to  sell  it ; by  all  the  enactments  in  the  several  States 
to  regulate  the  sale. , 

Wc  have  not  now  the  point  to  argue  that  it  is  right  to  make 
laws,  in  certain  cases,  prohibiting  the  sale.  The  laws  now  assuma 


THE  THKONK  OP  INIQUITY 


1 


that  it  18  right  to  prohibit  the  sale  by  large  classes  of  the  citi- 
zens, foi  the  laws  entrust  the  sale  to  a selected  few.  and  restrain 
all  others. 

We  have  not  now  the  point  to  argue  that  such  a law  as  is  pro- 
posed, amounting  to  an  entire  prohibition,  would  be,  in  any  one 
of  the  States,  conformable  to  the  Constitution  of  the  United  States 
for  this  point  has  been  settled  by  the  highest  judicial  authority 
in  the  land.  In  the  celebrated  “license  cases,”  involving  the 
constitutionality  of  laws  passed  by  the  States  of  Massachusetts, 
Rhode  Island,  and  New  Hampshire,  “ for  discouraging  the  use  of 
ardent  spirits,  by  prohibiting  their  sale  in  small  quantities,  and 
without  licenses  previously  granted  by  the  State  authorities,”  the 
constitutionality  of  those  laws  was  affirmed,  and  the  following 
opinions  were  expressed  by  the  justices  on  the  general  subject. 
See  5 Howard’s  “Reports  of  Cases  argued  and  adjudged  in  the 
Supreme  Court  of  the  United  States,”  pp.  504-633. 

Chief-Justice  Taney  said  : “ If  any  State  deems  the  retail  and 
internal  traffic  in  ardent  spirits  injurious  to  its  citizens,  and  calcu- 
lated to  produce  idleness,  vice,  or  debauchery,  I see  nothing  in 
the  Constitution  of  the  United  States  to  prevent  it  from  regulat- 
ing or  restraining  the  traffic,  oi-  from  prohibiting  it  altogether,  if 
it  thinks  proper.’’ — 5 Howard  577. 

Mr.  J ustice  McLean  said  : “ A license  to  sell  an  article,  foreigB 
or  domestic,  as  a merchant,  or  inn-keeper,  or  victualler,  is  a mat- 
ter of  police  and  revenue,  within  the  poioer  of  the  State," — 5 How- 
ard 589.  And  again:  “It  is  the  settled  construction  of  every 
regulation  of  commerce  that,  under  the  sanction  of  its  general 
laws,  no  person  can  introduce  into  a community  malignant  diseases, 
or  anything  which  contaminates  its  morals  or  endangers  its  safety.” 
— Ibid.  “ If  the  foreign  article  be  injurious  to  the  health  or  mo- 
rals of  the  community,  a State  may,  in  the  exercise  of  that  great 
and  comprehensive  police  power  which  lies  at  the  foundation  of 
its  prosperity,  prcA/Stf  the  sale  of  it." — Ibid.  592.  “No  one  can 
claim  a license  to  retail  spirits  as  a matter  of  right.” — Ibid.  597. 

Mr.  Justice  Catron  said  : “ If  the  State  has  the  power  of  restraint 
by  licenses  to  any  extent,  she  has  the  discretionary  power  to  judge 
of  its  limits,  and  may  go  to  the  length  of  prohibiting  sales  alto- 
gether.”— 5 Ho-ward  611. 

Mr.  J ustice  Daniel  said  of  imports  that  are  cleared  of  all  control 
of  the  government  which  permits  their  introduction:  “They  are 
like  all  other  property  of  the  citizen,  and  should  be  equally  the 
Bubjects  of  domestic  regulation  and  taxation,  whether  owned  by  aa 


8 


THE  THEOKE  OF  INIQUITY. 


importer  or  his  vender,  or  may  have  been  purchased  by  cargo, 
package,  bale,  piece,  or  yard,  or  by  hogsheads,  casks,  oi 
bottles.” — 5 Howard  614.  In  answering  the  argument  that  the 
importer  purchases  the  right  to  sell  when  he  pays  duties  to  the 
Government,  Mr.  Daniels  continues  to  say  : “No  such  right  as  the 
one  supposed  is  purchased  by  the  importer,  and  no  injury  in  any 
accurate  sense  is  inflicted  on  him  by  denying  to  him  the  power 
demanded.  He  has  not  purchased,  and  cannot  purchase,  from  the 
Government  that  which  it  could  not  ensure  to  him — a mh,  independ/- 
*.ntly  of  the  laws  and  policy  of  the  States." — Had.  616. 

Mr.  Justice  Woodbury  said:  “ After  articles  have  come  within 
the  territorial  limits  of  States,  whether  on  land  or  water,  the 
destruction  itself  of  what  constitutes  disease  and  death,  and  the 
longer  continuance  of  such  articles  within  their  limits,  or  the  terms 
and  conditions  of  their  continuance,  when  conflicting  with  their 
legitimate  police,  or  with  their  power  over  internal  commerce,  or 
with  their  right  of  taxation  over  all  persons  and  property  within 
their  jurisdiction,  seems  one  of  the  first  principles  of  State 
sovereignty,  and  indispensable  to  public  safety.” — 5 Howard 
630. 

Mr.  Justice  Grier  said:  “It  is  not  necessary  to  array  the 
appalling  statistics  of  misery,  pauperism,  and  crime  which  have 
their  origin  in  the  use  and  abuse  of  ardent  spirits.  The  police 
power,  which  is  exclusively  in  the  State,  is  alone  competent  to  the 
correction  of  tliese  great  evils,  and  all  measures  of  restraint  or  pro- 
hibition necessary  to  effect  that  piui'pose  are  within  the  scope  of  that 
authority.  There  is  no  conflict  of  power  or  of  legislation  as 
between  the  States  and  the  United  States;  each  is  acting  within 
its  sphere,  and  for  the  public  good,  and  if  a loss  of  revenue  should 
accrue  to  the  United  States  from  a diminished  consumption  of 
ardent  spirits,  she  will  be  a gainer  a thousand-fold  in  the  health, 
wealth,  and  happiness  of  the  people" — 5 Howard  632.  These 
opinions  put  beyond  question  the  constitutionality  of  the  law 
which  is  asked  for. 

What  is  asked  for,  therefore,  in  this  case  is  not  that  there 
shouldbe  legislation  on  the  subject,  but  that  the  legislation  should 
be  right.  The  principle  now  assumed  in  the  legislation  on  the 
subject  is  that  an  acknowledged  evil,  which  if  left  to  itself 
would  only  spread  woe  and  ruin  through  a community,  is  to  be 
tole'''ated  and  regulated ; that  a business  always  dangerous  to  the 
health,  and  morals,  and  souls  of  men  is  to  be  restrained,  but  nd 
forbidden.  We  ask  that  it  should  he  prohibited  altogether. 


THE  THRONE  OF  INIQUITY. 


9 


The  principles  in  legislation  to  which  I referred  as  bearing  on 
public  evils  are  five  in  number. 

1.  First,  society  has  a right  to  protect  iUelf.  I do  not  know 
that  this  would  be  called  in  question,  for  it  is  universally  acted 
on ; but  the  importance  of  the  principle  itself,  and  its  connection 
with  the  point  before  us,  demand  that  it  should  be  well  under- 
etood,  and  that  its  bearings  should  be  clearly  seen.  It  is  import- 
ant to  understand  that  there  is  such  a right,  in  fact,  and  to  se» 
clearly  to  what  it  extends. 

(«)  In  regard  to  the  fact,  it  may  be  remarked  that  it  is  inherent 
in  the  nature  of  a right  that  there  should  be  the  prerogative  of 
self-protection  or  self-  defence,  and  that  all  societies  and  all  indi- 
viduals act  on  it. 

God  has  a right  to  protect  his  own  government,  not  to  say  him- 
self, and  is  constantly  doing  it,  by  all  his  prohibitions  of  certain 
courses  of  conduct ; by  all  the  penalties  affixed  to  his  laws ; by 
all  tfie  punishments  which  he  brings  on  transgressors ; by  all  that 
he  does  to  overthrow  and  crush  the  enemies  of  himself  and  of  hia 
kingdom. 

Man  as  an  individual,  or  as  the  head  of  a family,  has  a right  to 
protect  himself  or  his  family  by  all  the  wisdom  which  he  has  ; 
by  all  the  strength,  properly  employed,  which  he  possesses;  by 
all  the  aid  which  he  can  secure  from  the  magistrate  under  the 
operation  of  law ; and  by  all  his  appeals  to  the  God  of  truth  and 
justice.  There  are  arrangements  everywhere  to  secure  him  in 
the  protection  of  his  rights,  and  he  does  no  wrong  if  he  avails 
himself  of  these  to  defend  those  rights  against  all  who  would 
invade  them. 

Society  has  a right  to  protect  itself.  The  right  is  inherent  in 
the  organization.  It  is  always  acted  on.  If  it  were  not  so,  the 
attempt  to  organize  civil  society  would  be  a farce.  In  all  civil 
society  it  is  assumed  that  this  is  so.  Hence  the  enactment  of 
laws ; the  affixing  of  penalties  to  laws ; the  institution  of  courts ; 
the  establishment  of  a police  force ; the  infliction  of  fines  and 
imprisonment;  the  cutting  off  of  those  who  are  dangerous  by 
capital  punishment ; the  employment  of  a military  force  to  sup- 
press riot  and  rebellion;  the  resisting  of  foreign  invaders;  and 
the  suppression  of  treason.  All  these  proceed  on  the  principle 
that  society  has  a right  to  protect  itself  so  as  to  secure  the  ends 
of  the  organization. 

(&)  But  to  what  does  the  right  extend?  Clearly  to  everything 
where  injury  or  wrong  would  be  done.  In  God’s  government  ii 


10 


THE  THRONE  OF  INIQUITY. 


extends  to  everything  where  his  honor  or  his  law  is  involved ; in 
the  case  of  man  as  an  individual,  or  as  the  head  of  a family,  to 
everything  where  he  or  his  family  have  righU  which  are  invaded 
oy  others ; in  regard  to  society,  to  every  thing  which  pertains  to 
the  public,  and  which  affects  the  public  good.  “Let  a man,” 
says  Blackstone,  “be  ever  so  abandoned  in  his  principles,  oj 
picious  in  his  practice,  provided  he  keeps  his  vrickedness  to  him' 
self,  and  does  not  offend  against  the  rules  of  public  decency,  he 
is  out  of  reach  of  human  laws.  But  if  he  makes  his  vices  public, 
though  they  be  such  as  seem  principally  to  affect  himself  (as 
drunkenness  or  the  like),  they  then  become,  by  the  bad  example 
they  set,  of  pernicious  effect  to  society ; and  therefore  it  is  then 
the  business  of  human  laws  to  correct  them.” — i.  124. 

As  this  principle  is  interpreted  by  society,  it  extends  to  every- 
thing which  would  affect  its  good  order,  its  safety,  its  pros- 
perity, its  existence — a protection  of  society  extended  in  lehaJf 
of  all  that  would  promote  its  welfare  ; a protection  against  all 
that  would  injure,  endanger,  or  destroy  it.  It  is  a protection  ex 
tended  to  the  peaceful  pursuits  of  industry;  to  the  person  and 
reputation  of  individuals;  to  all  that  contributes  to  good  morals 
and  order;  to  the  rights  of  conscience;  to  life,  liberty,  and  the 
pursuit  of  happiness.  It  is  a protection  of  the  community  against 
all  which  would  invade  it  by  force  and  arms ; against  all  which 
would  corrupt  or  weaken  it ; against  all  which  would  undermine 
the  public  morals ; against  all  vices,  as  Blackstone  specifies,  which 
are  of  a public  nature,  and  which  tend  by  example  to  be  of  per- 
nicious effects  in  society. 

On  these  principles  of  self-protection,  society  legislates  against 
lotteries,  against  gaming,  against  counterfeiting  the  public  coin, 
against  drunkenness,  against  profaneness,  against  poisonous  or 
corrupted  drugs,  against  any  employment  that  in  its  nature  tends 
to  endanger  the  public  health,  peace,  or  morals.  No  man,  on 
this  principle,  is  allowed  to  set  up  and  prosecute  a public  busi- 
ness, however  lucrative  it  may  be,  which  will  have  either  of 
these  effects;  for  the  public  good  is  of  more  consequence  than 
any  private  gain  could  be.  If,  foi  instance,  a man  should  set  up 
a lahery  in  this  city,  in  which,  by  the  infusion  of  a deleterious 
drug  into  his  bread,  he  would  endanger  the  public  health,  society 
would  not  hesitate  a moment  in  regarding  this  as  a proper  subject 
of  legislation,  and  would  never  dream  of  tolerating  it,  or  taxing 
it,  or  regulating  it,  or  licensing  it.  If  from  the  bakeries  of  this 
city,  bread  of  such  a character  should  go  forth  for  a single 


THE  THKONB  OF  INIQUITY. 


11 


morning,  and  there  was  a general  concert  and  understanding 
among  the  bakers  to  continue  this  practice  as  the  regular  line 
of  their  business  — if  there  was  not  law  enough  in  the  commu- 
nity to  put  a stop  to  it,  thei’e  would  not  be  patience  and  for- 
hearmice  enough  to  prevent  a storm  of  public  indignation  that 
would  in  a day  lay  every  such  bakery  in  ruins.  There  arc  not 
as  many  bakeries  in  this  city  as  there  are  houses  for  selling 
intoxicating  liquors. 

3.  I lay  it  down,  as  a second  principle  in  regard  to  legisla- 
tion, that  society  should  not  by  its  laws  protect  evil.  This,  per- 
haps,. is  sutEciently  clear  from  the  remarks  already  made,  but  the 
importance  of  the  principle  in  itself,  and  in  the  application 
which  I intend  to  make  of  it,  requires  that  it  should  be  made 
a little  more  distinct  and  prominent.  The  position  is  that  the 
purpose  of  society  in  organizing  a government,  and  the  purpose 
of  a government  under  such  an  organization,  should  not  be  to  vro~ 
tect  evil  in  any  form.  The  law  is  made  for  the  lawless  and  dis- 
obedient, for  the  ungodly  and  for  sinners,  for  unholy  and  pro- 
fane, for  murderers  of  fathers  and  murderers  of  mothers,  for 
manslayers,  for  whoremongers,  for  those  that  defile  themselves 
with  mankind,  for  men-stealers,  for  liars,  and  for  perjured  per- 
sons ” (1  Tim.  i.  9),  and  not  to  piotect  those  who  practise  these 
vices,  or  to  protect  anything  which  will  give  facility  in  practising 
them.  The  true  object  of  legislation  is  to  prevent.^  not  to  protect, 
evil.  Gon  never  instituted  a government  on  the  earth  with  a view 
to  its  throwing  a protecting  shield  over  vice  and  immorality  ; he 
has  never  commissioned  men  to  sit  in  high  places  to  accomplish 
any  such  work.  The  end  of  government,  so  far  as  it  bears  on 
that  point  at  all,  is  to  suppress  crime ; to  punish  wrongdoers ; to 
remove  iniquity,  to  promote  that  which  is  just  and  true.  And 
it  matters  not  what  the  evil  is,  nor  how  lucrative  it  may  be  made, 
nor  how  much  capital  may  be  invested  in  it,  nor  how  much 
revenue  may  be  derived  from  it,  nor  how  many  persons  may  have 
an  interest  in  its  continuance,  the  business  of  the  lawgiver  is  to 
suppress  it,  not  to  protect  it;  to  bring  it  to  as  speedy  an  end  as 
possible,  not  to  become  the  panderer  to  it  or  the  patron  of  it. 
What  would  be  thought  of  a government  that  should,  under  any 
pretext  whatever,  take  under  its  protecting  care  thieves,  couji- 
terfeiters,  and  burglars  ? 

3.  A third  principle  in  regard  to  legislation  is  equally  deal 
and  equally  important.  It  is  that  society  should  not  undertake 
fc>  regulate  evil  hy  law.  Its  business  is  to  remove  it,  not  to  regu- 


12 


THE  THRONE  OP  INIQUITY 


late  it.  This  principle,  also,  would  seem  to  be  plain  enough  on 
its  very  announcement,  but  it  bears  so  directly  on  the  point 
before  us  that  it  is  proper  to  dwell  on  it  a moment  longer.  What 
would  a government  be  that  should  undertake  to  regulate  mur- 
der, arson,  adultery,  burglary,  or  theft  ? What  would  laws  be 
that  should  “license”  such  crimes  in  any  circumstances  and 
under  any  restrictions?  What  would  a law  be  that  should 
undertake  to  derive  a revenue  from  the  act  of  poisoning  innocent 
children  under  suitable  restraints  and  safeguards,  or  that  should 
authorize  the  burning  of  a house  or  barn  by  night  under  proper 
checks,  and  with  suitable  security  in  regard  to  the  good  moral 
character  of  him  who  did  it  ? 

I admit  that  there  have  been  times  and  countries  in  which  the 
principle  against  which  I am  now  speaking  has  been  regarded  as 
a proper  principle  in  legislation.  Theft  was  tolerated  and  en- 
couraged in  Sparta  when  properly  regulated.  In  France,  at  one 
time,  it  was  regarded  as  proper  that  licentiousness  should  be 
taken  under  the  protection  of  law,  and  should  be  licensed  and 
regulated ; and  so  gaming  has  been  licensed  and  regulated ; and 
so  lotteries  have  been,  and  so  horse-racing  has  been,  and  so 
bull-baiting,  and  cock-fighting,  and  brutal  contests  between  man 
and  man  have  been.  You  may  find  countries,  I admit,  where 
these  things  are  still  done  ; but  the  progress  of  the  world  is 
towards  that  point  which  I have  laid  down  as  a principle  in  all 
just  legislation — that  the  object  of  law  is  not  to  regulate,  but  to 
remove,  evil.  We  have  applied  this  principle  to  lotteries,  to  horse- 
racing, and  to  gaming.  We  have  applied  it  to  the  crimes  of  arson, 
theft,  murder,  treason,  duelling,  adultery,  and  polygamy.  We 
have  practically  applied  it  to  the  barbarous  sports  of  the  amphi- 
theatre, to  bull-baiting,  and  to  open  and  disgraceful  contests 
between  man  and  man.  But  we  have7m<  applied  it  to  all  things. 
There  is  one  great  evil  that  still  lingers  among  us,  where  the 
principle  is  adopted  and  acted  on  it  that  is  to  be  regulated,  not 
removed;  that  it  is  to  be  placed  under  suitable  restraints,  and 
made  subservient  to  the  purposes  of  Government  by  raising  a 
revenue.  This  stands  by  itself,  perhaps  the  solitary  instance 
of  this  kind  of  legislation  in  our  land.  In  all  other  cases,  the 
grand  prineiple  is  adopted  and  acted  on  that  no  temporary  bene- 
fit, no  profitable  investment  of  capital,  no  purpose  of  raising  a 
revenue,  would  justify  a legislative  body  jn  tolerating  an  evil 
and  regulating  it  by  law.  The  doctrine  which  I am  defending 
Is  that  this  principle  should  be  adopted  in  regard  to  aU  that  is 


THE  THROVE  OF  INIQUITY. 


IS 


evil;  that  the  great  purpose  of  government  is  to  remove  it,  not  to 
patronize  and  regulate  it. 

4.  I state,  as  a fourth  principle  in  regard  to  legislation,  tlial  - 
society  has  a right  to  take  efficient  means  to  prevent  or  lemova 
an  evil.  As  an  illustration  of  this,  and  as  bearing  on  the  point 
before  us,  I refer  to  what  comes  under  the  denomination  of  a 
nuisance,  I intend  to  use  the  word  nuisance,  not  only  in  its 
proper  legal  signification,  but  in  a large  sense  as  extending  to 
public  morals,  as  well  as  to  public  comfort  and  convenience. 

The  propriety  of  this  principle  is  so  well  settled  in  regard  to 
what  ia  properly  and  legally  called  a nuisance  that  it  is  needless 
to  attempt  to  argue  it  here.  A ‘ ‘ nuisance  is  that  w'hich  annoys 
or  gives  trouble  and  vexation ; that  wdiich  is  offensive  or  noxious. 
A liar  is  a nuisance  to  society.” — Wehster's  Die.  It  is  a settled 
principle  that  a man  may  himself  remove  a private  nuisance  (3 
Blackstone  5),  provided  he  causes  no  riot  by  it ; a public  nuisance 
is  to  be  removed  by  proper  process  of  law.  What  I am  now 
saying  is  that  society  has  a right  to  make  provision  by  law  for 
the  prevention  or  removal  of  all  that  can  properly  come  under 
this  name,  no  matter  w'ho  is  affected  or  how  much  property 
IS  rendered  worthless. 

Nuisances  or  evils  that  individuals  or  society  have  a right  to 
protect  themselves  against  are  such  things,  as  defined  in  the  law- 
books, as  rue  following;  a man’s  building  his  house  so  near  to 
mine  that  his  roof  overhangs  my  roof ; erecting  a house  or  other 
building  so  near  to  mine  that  it  obstructs  my  ancient  lights  and 
windows ; keeping  noisome  animals  so  near  to  the  house  of  another 
that  the  stenen  of  them  incommodes  him,  and  makes  the  air 
unwholesome;  a setting  up  and  exercising  an  offensive  trade, 
as  a tanner’s  or  a fallow-chandler’s;  erecting  a smelting-house 
for  lead  so  near  to  the  land  of  another  that  the  vapor  and  smoke 
kill  his  corn  and  grass,  and  damage  his  cattle.  And  so  to  stop 
or  divert  water  that  uses  to  run  to  another’s  meadow  or  mill,  or 
to  corrupt  or  poison  a water-course,  by  erecting  a dye-house  or 
lime-pit  for  the  use  of  trade  in  the  upper  part  of  the  stream,  is  a 
nuisance  which  society  has  a right  to  abate. — 3 Blackstone  317, 
218.  “ So  clearly,”  says  the  great  author  of  the  “Commentaries 

on  the  Laws  of  England,”  “ does  the  law  of  England  enforce  that 
excellent  rule  of  Gospel  morality,  of  doing  to  others  as  eve  would 
they  should  do  unto  ourselves.”  And  so  the  same  great  writer, 
in  another  place,  says,  “All  disorderly  inns,  or  ale-houces, 
bawdy-houses,  gaming-houses,  stage-plays  unlicensed  _ baotki 


14 


THE  THEON’E  OF  INIQUITY. 


and  stages  for  rope-dancers,  mountebanks,  and  the  like,  ara 
public  nuisances.” — i Blacks.  167.  So  lotteries  hare  often  been 
declared  public  nuisances,  and  have  been  suppressed  by  law  as 
such;  and  so  the  selling  of  fireworks  and  squibs,  or  throwing 
them  about  in  the  street,  is  a nuisance. — 4 Blacks.  168.  On  these 
principles,  our  own  commentator  on  American  law  says:  “The 
Government  may,  by  general  regulations,  interdict  such  uses  of 
property  as  would  create  nuisances,  and  become  dangerous  to  the 
lives,  or  health,  or  peace,  or  comfort  of  the  citizens.  Unwhole- 
some trades,  slaughter-houses,  operations  offensive  to  the  senses, 
the  deposit,  of  powder,  the  building  with  combustible  ma^rials, 
and  the  burial  of  the  dead,  may  be  interdicted  by  law,  ia  the 
midst  of  -Jense  masses  of  poimlation,  on  the  general  and  rational 
principle  that  every  person  ought  so  to  use  his  property  as  not 
to  injure  his  neighbors,  and  that  private  interest  must  be  made 
subservient  to  the  general  interest  of  the  communit3u” — 3 Kent 
340. 

These,  then,  are  nuisances  that  may  be  abated;  these  are  uses 
of  p’-operty  that  may  be  interdicted  by  law  for  the  sake  of  the 
public  health,  peace,  comfort.  Private  interest  is  to  be  sacrificed 
to  public  good,  and  society  is  to  take  care  that  property  shall  not 
be  so  used  as  to  be  detrimental  to  the  public  happiness.  This 
principle  is  of  broad  application  in  a community,  and  society 
acquiesces  in  it  as  just  and  equal.  Law  is  not  to  protect  any  man 
who  so  uses  his  own  property  as  to  invade  the  rights,  endanger 
the  health,  destroy  the  comfort,  or  peril  the  welfare  of  his  neigh- 
bor or  of  society  at  large. 

There  are  moral  nuisances  as  well  as  physical — nuisances  affect- 
ing the  peace,  the  good  order,  the  domestic  virtues  of  a com- 
munity, and  all  so  much  the  worse,  and  so  much  the  more 
dangerous,  as  the  peace,  the  good  order,  the  domestic  virtues 
of  a community  are  of  more  importance  than  its  physical  com- 
forts ; and  if  the  one  may  be  abated  or  removed,  by  so  much  the 
more  may  the  other.  A man  has  no  more  right  to  employ  his 
p^perty  so  that  in  all  probability,  and  as  the  regular  result  of  his 
business,  it  will  destroy  domeslic  comfort,  reduce  his  neighbor 
to  beggary,  and  bring  upon  him  disease  and  death,  or  scatter 
discord  and  woe  through  a community,  than  he  has  to  set  up  a 
tannery  or  a tallow-chandlery  in  a neighborhood,  or  to  obstruct 
my  “ ancient  lights  and  windows  ” ; and  if  society  may  extend  its 
vigilance  over  the  one,  it  may  over  the  other. 

The  property  that  does  the  most  mischief,  either  under  th« 


THE  THRONE  OP  INIQUITY. 


15 


protection  of  law  or  without  the  protection  of  law;  that  does  the 
most  to  increase  the  public  burdens  by  making  paupers  and  by 
multiplying  crimes ; that  causes  most  estates  to  melt  away,  and 
that  most  diminishes  the  productive  industry  of  the  nation  by 
indisposing  or  disabling  ruen  from  labor;  that  produces  the 
most  wretched  forms  of  bodily  aud  mental  suffering;  that  con- 
signs most  persons  to  the  grave  and  to  perdition,  is  that  which  is 
employed  in  the  manufacture  and  sale  of  intoxicating  drinks 
All  the  property  employed  by  tallow-chandlers  and  tanners,  and 
the  makers  or  sellers  of  squibs,  and  by  dyers,  or  in  any  other 
forms  of  nuisance,  or  that  would  be  employed  if  there  were  no 
laws  to  prohibit  it,  and  all  the  injury  done  to  the  prosperity 
or  happiness  of  a community  by  employing  property  in  such 
operations,  is  a nameless  trifle  compared  with  the  evil  done  by 
the  manufacture  and  sale  of  intoxicating  drinks.  It  would  be 
impossible  to  induce  men,  by  any  protection  which  the  law  could 
give,  to  em^floy  property  so  as  to  do  as  much  mischief  in  any  other 
way. 

5.  A fifth  principle  in  regard  to  legislation  is  that  society  has 
a right  to  prevent  or  remove  an  evil  by  destroying  private  prop- 
erty, or  rendering  it  valueless,  if  necessary. 

This  principle  is  recognized  in  a case  where  other  property  or 
where  life  may  be  endangered,  as  in  blowing  up  a house  to  stop 
the  progress  of  a conflagration.  It  is  recognized  in  the  confisca- 
tion of  goods  in  a contraband  trafiic.  It  is  recognized  in  the  case 
of  damaged  hides,  or  corrujrted  drugs,  or  tainted  meat  in  the 
market,  or  the  tools  aud  implements  of  counterfeiters.  ‘‘The 
acknowledged  police  power  of  a State, ’’says  Mr.  Justice  McLean 
(5  Howard’s  Reports  589),  “extends  often  to  the  destruction  of 
property.  A nuisance  may  be  abated.  Everything  prejudicial 
to  the  health  or  morals  of  a city  may  be  removed.  Merchandise 
from  a port  where  a contagious  disease  jirevails,  being  liable  to 
communicate  diseases,  may  be  excluded;  and  in  extreme  cases 
it  may  be  thrown  into  the  sea.” 

The  object  in  these  last  cases  is  to  put  the  property  out  cf  Vi* 
way  ; to  prevent  its  doing  evil;  to  dispose  of  it  in  such  a manner 
that  it  shall  not  corrupt  the  health  and  the  morals  of  a com- 
munity. The  right  to  destroy  such  property  is  a right  inherent 
in  society,  aud  the  owner  of  damaged  hides,  or  corrupted  drugs, 
or  the  dies  and  stamps  used  in  counterfeiting  coin,  can  have 
no  right  to  complain,  even  if  his  property  is  rendered  worthless 
o»  is  destroyed.  And  if  the  seller  of  corrupted  drugs,  or  the 


16 


THK  THRONE  OF  INIQUITY. 


owner  of  the  dies  and  stamps  of  the  counterfeiters,  should  com 
plain,  and  should  assert  that  he  had  the  right  to  use  his  propertj 
as  he  pleased ; or  if  the  owner  of  tainted  meat  in  the  market 
should  assert  that  society  had  no  right  to  dispose  of  his 
property,  there  would  he  but  one  voice  and  one  feeling  in  an 
indignant  and  outraged  community  on  account  of  a claim  so 
monstrous.  Moreover,  if,  instead  of  destroying  such  property, 
or  ih  some  other  way  putting  it  beyond  the  power  of  doing  evil, 
any  municipal  body  should  authorize  the  business,  though  under 
certain  restrictions,  and  should  attempt  to  derive  a revenue  from 
(t  at  the  expense  of  the  life  and  health  of  large  numbers  of  its 
citizens,  it  would  be  an  outrage  on  all  legislation,  and  would 
excite  the  scorn  and  the  abhorrence  of  the  whole  civilized  world. 
Yet  there  is  no  property  that  so  certainly  and  so  uniformly  works 
evil  jn  a community  as  that  which  is  employed  in  the  manufac- 
ture and  sale  of  intoxicating  drinks ; and  all  the  capital  on  the 
face  of  the  earth  invested  in  damaged  hides,  and  corrupted 
drugs,  and  tainted  butcher’s  meat,  and  counterfeiter’s  tools,  is 
not  doing  an  appreciable  quantity  of  the  mischief  that  is  done  by 
the  property  that  is  invested  in  this  business. 

These  priuciples  seem  plain,  and  are  such  as  are  acted  on  in  the 
ordinary  course  of  legislation.  Society  could  not  exist  if  they, 
all  of  them,  or  any  one  of  them,  were  denied ; and,  in  ordinary 
matters,  we  all  feel  that  in  a case  covered  by  these  principles, 
we  have  a right  to  appeal  to  the  interposition  of  the  legislative 
power. 

It  remains,  then,  only  to  enquire  whether  they  have  a proper 
applicability  to  the  immediate  matter  before  us — the  evils,  the 
woes,_the  wrongs,  the  desolations  of  intemperance.  A.nd  in  refer- 
ence to  this,  there  are  two  enquiries : (a)  Why  should  we  invoke 
the  aid  of  legislation  at  all  ? And  (b)  why,  if  legislation  is  neces- 
sary and  proper,  should  the  principles  which  have  been  laid  down 
lead  to  an  entire  prohibition  of  the  tralBc  ? 

{a)  The  first  of  these  enquiries  is.  Why  should  we  invoke  the 
aid  of  legislation  at  all?  That  is,  in  other  words,  why  should  we 
not  leave  this,  as  we  do  other  points  of  morals,  and  as  we  do  reli- 
gion, to  the  influence  of  argument  and  moral  suasion,  to  the  reason, 
the  conscience,  and  the  interest  of  mankind  ? This  enquiry  can  be 
soon  answered.  I admit  that  argument  and  moral  suasion ; that 
appeals  to  the  reason,  the  conscience,  the  self-interest  of  men; 
appeals  founded  on  the  injury  that  intemperance  does  to  individu- 
als and  to  the  community — to  the  bodies  and  the  souls  of  men ; 


THE  THEONfi  OF  INIQUITY. 


17 


1 


appeals  founded  on  the  due  regard  to  health,  to  happiness,  and  to 
salvation,  should  be  plied  on  every  hand  ; and  I admit  that  much 
may  be  done  by  this,  as  there  has  been  heretofore  done,  to  stay  the 
progress  of  this  great  evil  in  our  land.  I admit  that  in  reference 
to  large  numbers  of  our  fellow-citizens,  it  h;^^  been,  and  it  will  be, 
all  that  is  needed.  But  I wish  to  show  you,  in  few  words,  why 
this  is  not  all  that  is  necessary,  and  why  the  temperance  reforma- 
tion can  never  be  complete  and  triumphant  except  by  that  kind 
of  legislation  which  I am  advocating. 

1.  First,  then,  the  state  has  vot  chosen  to  leave  it  to  argument 
and  moral  suasion.  It  has  chosen  to  legislate  on  it.  It  has  felt 
that  it  would  not  be  safe  to  leave  it,  as  it  does  religion  and  cha- 
rity, to  the  conscience  and  the  good  feelings  of  mankind.  It  has 
felt  that  it  would  not  be  safe  to  leave  it,  as  it  does  religion,  to  God 
and  to  his  Providence  and  Spirit.  It  has  legislated  upon  it.  It 
authorizes  the  sale.  It  seeks  to  regulate  it.  It  attempts  to  derive 
a revenue  from  it — as  it  does  not  from  damaged  hides,  and  tainted 
meat,  and  corrupted  drugs.  We  only  ask,  since  the  state  will  and 
must  legislate  on  it,  that  it  legislate  in  regard  to  this  as  it  does  to 
any  other  evil. 

2.  Secondly,  you  do  not  rely  on  argument  and  moral  suasion  in 
any  similar  case.  Why  not  rely  on  moral  suasion  and  appeals 
to  the  conscience  in  regard  to  lotteries  ? Why  not  continue  to 
license  them,  and  regulate  them,  and  derive  a revenue  from  them  ; 
and  if,  after  every  precaution,  there  are  still  evils  in  regard  to  them, 
why  not  endeavor  to  check  those  evils  by  appeals  to  the  con- 
sciences and  the  reason  of  the  men  engaged  in  selling  lottery 
tickets?  Why  not  pursue  the  same  course  in  regard  to  gaming 
establishments,  and  to  horse-racing,  and  bull-baiting;  and  if  there 
are  still  evils  in  regard  to  them,  seek  to  persuade  the  men  engaged 
in  these  pursuits  not  to  carry  them  too  far;  and  if  there  are  young 
men  liable  to  be  led  astray,  endeavor  by  moral  suasion  to  induce 
them  not  to  do  that  which  the  law'  allows?  And  why  not  extend 
the  same  principle  to  horse-stealing,  and  burglary,  and  arson,  aacl 
rely  on  moral  suasion  in  checking  these  evils?  Yet  not  one  of 
these  evils  does  an  appreciable  part  of  the  uiischiei  in  our  land 
which  is  done  by  the  traffic  in  ardent  spirits. 

3.  Thirdly,  there  is  a class  of  men,  and  those  most  deeply  inter- 
ested in  the  matter,  that  you  can  never  influence  by  moral  suasioii 
There  is  a portion  that  you  can.  The  conscientious  you  can.  The 

• men  that  truly  fear  God  you  can.  The  men  that  ordinarily  con- 
?ene  in  a Christian  house  of  worship  you  can.  Many  young  ma* 


18 


THE  THRONE  OF  INIQUITY. 


you  can.  Many  farmers,  mechanics,  professional  men  you  can. 
Many  men  engaged  in  the  traffic  you  can,  even  when  the  traffic  haa 
been  long  continued,  and  is  deemed  respectable.  I began  my 
ministry  in  a place  where  there  were  twenty  stores  in  which  ardent 
spirits  was  sold,  and  where  there  were  nineteen  distilleries  in  which 
it  was  manufactured.  In  my  youthful  ardor,  I made  an  appeal  to 
my  people  as  well  as  I was  able  on  the  subject.  I had  the  happi- 
ness of  seeing  the  traffic  abandoned  in  eighteen  of  those  stores, 
and  of  seeing  seventeen  of  those  distilleries  cease  to  pour  out  the 
streams  of  demoralization  and  death  on  the  community,  through 
the  influence  of  moral  suasion.  But  after  all  that  you  can  do  in 
such  a case,  do  you  not  know  that  there  is  a class  of  men  in  every 
community  that  you  cannot  reach  by  moral  suasion,  and  that  must 
be  restrained  by  law  ? They  are  men  who  enter  no  sanctuary  ; who 
place  themselves  aloof  from  argument;  whose  hearts  are  hard; 
whose  consciences  are  seared ; whose  sole  motive  is  gain  ; and  who, 
if  the  moral  part  of  the  commuuity  abandon  the  business,  will 
only  drive  it  on  themselves  the  faster.  What  are  you  to  do  with 
such  men  ? Are  you  to  protect  them  in  their  business  against  the 
general  sense  of  the  commuuity?  Are  you  to  throw'  the  shield  of 
law  over  them,  and  sanction  all  that  they  do  ? Are  you  to  license 
them,  and  derive  a revenue  froiii  their  business?  Are  you  to  make 
supplementary  provisions  to  sustain  all  the  paupers  they  will 
make,  and  to  pay  the  costs  of  all  the  prosecutions  for  crimes  that 
shall  result  from  their  employment?  How  are  you  to  check, 
restrain,  control,  such  men  ? Is  it  to  be  by  moral  suasion  ? All 
our  acts  of  legislation  answer.  No.  You  may  go  far  in  the  tempe- 
rance reformation  by  moral  suasion,  but  it  has  failed  in  removing 
the  evil,  and  from  the  nature  of  the  case  must  always  fail,  just  as 
anything  else  would,  while  the  state  throws  its  protecting  shield 
over  the  traffic  ; and  while  there  are  men,  principled  and  unprin- 
cipled, who  w'ill  take  advantage  of  such  protection,  and  resist  your 
arguments,  and  soothe  their  consciences  in  the  plea  that  what 
they  do  is  legnl. 

4.  And,  fourthly,  the  existing  legislation  does  not  prevent  the 
evil,  nor  can  any  legislation  that  proceeds  on  that  princijtle  pre- 
vent it.  All  such  legislation  must  be  ineffectual  on  any  sub- 
ject. It  is  a wrong  principle  to  authorize  anything  by  law  from 
which  men  are  to  be  dissuaded  by  moral  means ; a wrong  principle 
to  bring  the  law's  into  conflict  with  those  arguments  which  must 
be  used  to  restrain  men  from  vice  and  crime.  I venture  to  • 
affirm  that  aU  the  laws  ever  made  to  prevent  intemperance  unde* 


THE  THRONE  OF  INIQUITY. 


19 


the  system  of  licensing  persons  to  sell  intoxicating  drinks  always 
have  failed,  and  always  will  and  must  fail.  Is  any  man  restrained 
from  becoming  intemperate  by  the  license  law  ? Do  not  men 
drink  just  as  much  as  they  choose  ? Are  there  any  fewer  intem- 
perate men  in  any  community  in  virtue  of  those  laws  ? Is  it  not 
for  the  interest  of  men  who  pay  a revenue  to  the  state  for  a 
license  to  sell  as  much  of  their  article  of  traffic  as  they  can  ? 
Are  they  not  authorized  to  do  it  to  any  extent,  and  to  all  per- 
sons, and  to  persons  in  all  circumstances ; and  is  there  anything 
in  the  nature  of  the  case,  or  in  their  contract  with  the  State, 
to  prevent  it  ? Or  if  there  is,  can  you  prevent  it  ? When  a 
travelling  merchant  has  paid  a tax  to  the  state  for  the  privilege 
of  selling  his  wares,  does  he  not  feel  authorized  to  prosecute 
his  business  to  any  extent,  and  does  he  not  feel  that  L 3 has 
paid  a consideration — an  equivalent — to  the  commonwe£’.-.,h  for 
this  privilege  ? Are  not  men  authorised  to  sell  ardent  Sj  .rits  by 
a tavern  license,  and  is  not  this  the  very  thing  for  wh;  ,h  it  was 
granted  ? And  what  ground  of  ajjpeal  have  you  to  such  men 
as  long  as  they  can  plead  the  sanction  of  the  laws  of  the  land 
and  the  authority  of  the  State  ? Let  a father  approacli  such  a 
man,  and  remind  him  that  his  business  is  ruining  his  own  son. 
That  is  an  affair,  he  would  say,  of  the  State ; and  he  has  only, 
in  the  face  of  such  an  aj^peal,  to  show  his  license.  Let  a wife 
come  to  him  with  tears,  and  tell  him  of  the  woe,  and  poverty, 
and  wretchedness  that  his  business  is  introducing  into  her  once 
happy  home.  He  has  only  to  exhibit  his  license.  Let  a neigh- 
bor remind  him  of  the  evils  that  intemperance  does  in  a com- 
munity, and  entreat  him,  for  the  love  of  God  and  humanity,  to 
abandon  the  business.  He  has  only  to  show  his  license.  Let 
the  ministers  of  religion  plead,  and  let  them  set  forth  the  awful 
consequences  of  that  business  on  morals  and  religion,  in  time 
and  in  eternity,  and  he  has  only  coolly  to  show  his  license.  He 
is  doing  a business  which  is  legal — u.s  legal  as  the  work  of  the  far- 
mer. the  mechanic,  the  professional  man.  He  throws  off  respon- 
sibility. He  pleads  the  authority  of  the  State,  and  shelters 
himself  against  all  arguments,  and  all  appeals,  and  all  persua- 
sions under  the  broad  shield  of  that  protection.  And  I repeat, 
therefore,  the  declaration  that,  considered  as  a rest-aint  on  intem- 
perance, the  whole  license  system  has  failed,  and  must  aheays  fail. 
Just  as  many  men  become  intemperate  as  choose.  No  man  is 
restrained  from  procuring  the  intoxicating  cup.  Intemperance  in 
the  land  is  under  the  solemn  sanction  of  the  laws. 


20 


THE  THRONE  OF  INIQTJITT. 


0)  But  why,  if  legislation  is  necessary  and  proper,  should  th* 
principles  laid  down  in  this  discourse  lead  to  an  entire  prohibi- 
tion of  the  traffic  ? I may  now  answer  this  question  in  a very 
summary  way:  because  society  has  a right  to  protect  itself  front 
one  of  the  greatest,  if  not  the  very  greatest,  evils  ever  inflicted 
on  humanity;  because  society  should  not  protect  such  an  evil  by 
acts  of  legislation,  or  make  that  legal  which  good  men  are  seek- 
ing to  remove  by  moral  means  ; because  society  should  not 
attempt  to  regulate  an  evil,  but  should  seek  to  remove  it ; because 
society  has  a right  to  make  use  of  all  proper  means  to  prevent  or 
remove  an  evil  ; and  because,  if  necessary,  in  doing  this,  it  has 
a right  to  render  property  embarked  in  a particular  business 
worthless,  or  to  destroy  it.  On  these  broad  principles,  I advocate 
the  propriety  of  endeavoring  to  obtain  the  jiassage  of  such  laws 
as  shall  effectually  prohibit,  under  proper  and  effective  penalties, 
this  whole  traffic.  I start  no  metairhysical  and  abstract  question 
about  its  being  a sin  per  se  to  drink  wine,  or  brandy,  or  any 
other  intoxicating  drink.  I look  at  the  broad  fact  of  the  evil  in 
the  land,  and  say  that  an  evil  so  great  ought  to  be  restrained; 
that  the  principles  of  legislation  applied  to  other  subjects  ought 
to  be  applied  to  this ; and  that  there  is  no  other  conceivable  evil 
that  would  he  protected,  patronized,  shielded,  regulated,  as  this 
is,  in  a civilized  and  Christian  land. 

It  was  ascertained  some  years  since,  and  the  statistics  would 
be  more  dreadful  now  than  they  were  then,  that  thirty  thousand 
American  citizens  at  least  died  annually  from  intemperance, 
and  that  more  than  three  hundred  thousand  of  our  people  were 
intemperate  in  the  proper  sense  of  the  word.  It  was  ascertained 
that  a very  large  proportion  of  these  were  young  men — the  bone 
and  sinew  of  the  Eepublic,  the  hope  of  the  church  and  of  the  state, 
and  many  of  them  connected  with  the  best  families  of  the  land. 
It  was  ascertained  th.at  many  of  the  whole  number  were  taken 
from  the  bar,  the  medical  profession,  the  pulpit,  from  mercantile 
and  mechanical  walks,  where  they  might  have  been  eminently 
useful.  It  was  ascertained  that  they  sustained  all  the  most 
interesting  relations  of  human  life,  as  fathers,  husbands,  sons, 
and  brothers.  It  was  ascertained  that  the  vice  was  usually  ac- 
companied with  every  other  vice,  and  was  the  fruitful  source  of 
every  kind  of  crime.  It  was  ascertained — or  there  was  strong 
reason  to  suspect — that  among  the  number  of  the  intemperats 
were  some  thousands  of  females — sustaining  the  various  relations 
©f  wife,  mother,  daughter,  sister.  It  was  ascertained,  on  the 


THE  THEONB  OF  IITIQUITT. 


21 


most  diligent  enquiries,  that  from  three-fourths  to  nine-tenths  of 
the  prosecutions  for  crime  sprang  in  some  way  out  of  intempe- 
rance, and  that  from  three-fourths  to  nine-tenths  of  all  the  expenaa 
necessary  to  maintain  the  paujDers  in  the  community  sprang 
from  the  same  source.  It  was  declared  by  the  great  body  of 
physicians,  and  as  far  as  I know  by  all  whose  attention  was  called 
to  the  subject,  that  there  is  no  nutriment  in  alcoholic  drinks;  that 
they  furnish  no  permanent  strength  to  the  body  ; that  they  are 
dangerous  to  health,  and  that  on  the  tissues  of  the  stomach  they 
act  like  a slow  poison,  producing  ultimate  disease  ; that  among 
the  maladies  produced  is  one  of  the  most  frightful  forms  of 
insanity;  and  that  the  regular  effect  of  indulgence,  however 
hardy  the  frame  may  be,  will  be  ultimately  death.  It  was  pro- 
claimed by  the  ministers  of  religion  that  there  is  no  other  single 
cause  that  gives  occasion  for  so  much  discipline  in  the  church  ; 
that  nothing  stands  so  much  in  the  way  of  the  success  of  the 
Gospel  which  they  preach ; and,  as  the  physician  made  a state- 
ment about  the  body,  so  they  proclaimed  that  nothing  does  so 
much  effectually  to  destroy  the  soul.  These  and  kindred  truths 
were  proclaimed  through  the  land  ; and  there  were  none  to 
gainsay  them,  for  it  could  not  be  done. 

The  people  of  the  city  and  county  of  Philadelphia — and  the 
same  substantially  is  true  all  over  the  commonwealth  and  the 
nation — pay  for  the  expenses  of  the  criminal  courts,  and  for  the 
almshouses,  somewhere  about  three-fourths  of  the  whole  as  a 
premium  on  intemperance,  and  as  the  result  of  the  traffic  in 
intoxicating  drinks.  The  taxes  to  meet  these  expenses  are  paid 
by  the  sober,  the  temperate,  the  industrious,  the  pious.  Out 
State  derives  a revenue  of  about  one  hundred  thousand  dollars 
annually  from  tavern  licenses — a “penny  wise  and  pound 
foolish  ” operation ; for  in  the  city  and  county  of  Philadelphia 
alone,  the  expenses  of  maintaining  the  poor,  made  such  by  the 
business,  and  of  prosecuting  for  the  crimes  produced  by  it,  and 
of  preventing  disorder  and  riot  caused  by  it,  exceed  by  far  all 
the  revenue  derived  from  this  source  in  the  whole  common- 
wealth.* This  is  unequal  ; it  is  wrong.  It  is  a heavy  and 

•The  exact  sum  received  in  the  city  and  county  of  Philadelphia  for  tayem 
licenses  n the  year  1851  was  $60,302  ; the  whole  sum  of  tne  State  was  about 
$108,000.  The  expenses  for  prosecuting  for  crime,  and  for  the  support  of  pauper- 
ism, consequent  on  intemperance,  in  the  city  and  county,  was,  for  the  same  yean 
us  accurately  as  it  can  be  computed,  $365,000.  As  showing  the  nature  and  the 
extent  of  the  burd  ms  restingr  on  the  community  as  the  result  of  the  license  system, 
•ndthe  trafflt  in  ardent  spirits,  it  may  be  proper  to  present  some  statistics  respect' 


22 


THB  THRONE  OP  INIQUITY. 


Bppressive  burden.  It  exists  in  reference  to  nothing  else.  It  ii 
worse  than  the  “stamp  act”  and  the  tax  on  “tea.”  Asa  sobei 
and  industrious  citizen,  I cannot  be  required  on  any  just  principle 
to  support  the  pauperism  and  crime  made  by  the  business  ot 
another ; and  yet  there  is  not  a licensed  tavern  or  an  unlicensed 
tavern  in  the  community,  however  low  and  vile,  that  dees  not 
make  it  necessary  to  tax  the  sober  and  the  virtuous  to  meet  the 
evils  which  are  the  regular  result  of  its  business. 

Should  an  evil  like  this  be  protected  by  laws;  should  it  be 
assumed  that  it  is  to  continue  to  exist;  should  an  attempt  be 
made  merely  to  regulate  it ; should  it  have  the  patronage  of  the 
state,  and  be  made  legal ; should  a virtuous  community  consent 
to  be  taxed  to  sustain  it;  should  intelligent  and  pious  men  lend 
their  countenance  to  it  ? Shall  a man  be  restrained  from  setting 
up  a slaughter-house,  or  a glue  manufactory,  or  dye-works,  at  my 
door,  and  allowed  to  open  a fountain  that  is  certainly  destined  to 
corrupt  the  morals  and  the  peace  of  the  neighborhood ; that  is  to 
multiply  crime  and  pauperism ; that  will  ruin  the  bodies  and  the 
souls  of  men  ? 

We  shall  be  told,  perhaps,  that  this  is  a free  country,  and  that 
the  proposed  law  is  a restraint  on  freedom.  Free  it  is ; but  not 
for  everything.  It  is  not  free  to  sell  lottery-tickets,  or  to  set  up 
nuisances,  or  to  counterfeit  the  coin,  or  to  open  houses  avowedly 
of  infamy. 

We  may  be  told  that  it  is  wrong  to  prevent  men  by  law  from 
drinking  what  they  please.  That  is  not  the  point:  it  is  that 
the  state  shall  not  authorize  them  to  manufacture  and  sell  what 
they  please. 

We  may  be  told  that  it  is  impossible  to  carry  the  legislature 

j)g  the  Philadelphia  almshonse — an  institution  that  may  be  properly  regarded  aa 
furnishing  a fair  illustration  of  the  working  of  the  present  system  throughout  the 
land.  It  is  taken  from  the  report  of  the  Guardians  of  the  Poor  : “ The  number  ef 
cases  treated  in  the  hospital  in  the  Blockley  Almshouse,  in  1851,  was  5,000.  Intem- 
perate-males, 2,709;  women,  897;  total,  3,606,  out  of  5,000.  There  were  also  of 
mania-a-potu,  with  slight  delirium,  34.3  : do.,  tvith  hallucination.  114  ; ■Solent 
mania,  157  ; total  mania-5-potu,  614.”  Nearly  four  thousand  persons  supported  ij 
the  public  expense,  in  a single  city  and  county,  as  the  result  of  the  traffic  in  arcti.. 
spirits,  and  more  than  six  hundred  afflicted  with  the  most  dreadful  form  of  insanity 
that  ever  comes  upon  man— a business  tolerated,  protected,  sustained  by  law,  and 
requiring  heiivy  taxes  on  the  sober  and  industrious  for  its  support  1 What  Oihei 
conceivable  business  is  there  that  in  a civilized  and  Christian  land  would  he  pro- 
tected or  tolerated,  which  would,  in  a single  year,  and  every  year,  in  a f itfl* 
county,  dethrone  the  inteliect  in  more  than  six  hundred  cases,  and  convert  man 
sis  hundred  citizens  into  frightful  maniacs  ? 


THE  THRONE  OP  INTQUITT. 


23 


for  the  passage  of  such  a law.  That  will  depend  on  the  wishes 
of  the  State ; for  our  legislators  are  the  representatives  of  the 
people,  and  the  people  can  do  as  they  please. 

We  may  be  told  that  the  people  cannot  be  brought  to  such  a 
state  as  to  demand  the  passage  of  such  a law.  That  remains  to 
be  seen.  It  is  not  absolutely  certain  what  would  be  the  effect 
of  a popular  vote  on  the  suliject  to-morrow,  if  the  question  were 
submitted  to  the  people.  Besides,  it  is  to  be  assumed  in  this 
country  that  the  peojjle  can  be  induced  to  demand  the  passage 
of  any  reasonable  and  just  law.  and  that  they  can  be  prevailed 
on  to  send  representatives  that  will  do  it.  Moreover,  it  is  sup- 
posed that  there  may  be  hundreds  of  intemperate  men  them- 
selves who  would  vote  for  such  a law — men  who  see  the  evil 
of  their  course  and  their  danger;  men  who  desire  to  reform, 
but  who  have  not  strength  to  resist  temptation,  but  who  would 
feel  that  the  brighter  days  of  their  early  years  would  revisit 
them  again  if  the  temptation  were  removed  for  ever  from  their 
reach. 

We  may  be  told  that  it  would  be  impossible  to  execute  such  a 
law  in  our  State,  and  especially  in  our  great  cities.  That  may 
he;  but  it  is  never  to  be  assumed  in  this  country  that  a law 
deliberately  passed  by  the  representatives  of  the  people,  and 
after  it  has  been  faiily  before  the  minds  of  the  people,  cannot 
be  executed.  What  law  is  there  that  has  not  been  cxecutea  ? 
What  law  is  there  that  cannot  be  ? The  remedy  for  obnoxi(/us 
laws  in  this  land  is  not  resistance,  but  change  ; and  io  is  always  to 
be  assumed  by  our  legislators,  and  by  the  people  too,  that  a law 
can  be  executed,  and  that  it  will  be  executed,  until  the  contrary 
is  proved. 

But  it  may  be  asked  still,  What  if  we  fail — fail  in  gettii.g  the 
law ; fail  in  its  execution  ? I answer,  in  the  words  of  Lady 
Macbeth,  “ We  failP  So  be  it.  We  fail  now.  We  fail  in  all 
our  attempts  to  stop  the  progress  of  intemperance.  We  fail  in 
moral  suasion.  We  fail  under  the  existing  laws.  We  /all  in  all 
societies;  by  all  appeals;  by  all  arguments;  by  all  nrthods  of 
influencing  the  public  mind ; by  all  preaching  and  ie^^uring ; by 
all  parental  counsel;  and  by  all  the  .jiortraying  of  the  widespread 
evils  of  intemperance.  In  all  these  things  we  fau,  A" bile  the  law 
patronizes  it ; while  the  State  legalizes  it  ; while  c<ie  statutes  of 
the  land  authorize  it.  And  in  such  efforts  wo  must  alw'ays 
fail,  just  as  we  would  in  banishing  lotteries,  or  in  closing 
gaming-houses  that  are  sanctioned  by  law'.  But  suppose  we  do 


24 


BAKNES  ON  THE  MAINE  LAW. 


fail.  Tlie  evil  cannot  easily  be  -worse,  and  we  shall  have  made  OB« 
more  effort  to  remove  that  great  curse  that  has  settled  do-wn  oa 
our  land.  But  there  is  a God  in  heaven ; and  men  in  a righteotu 
cause,  when  they  put  their  trust  in  him,  do  not  -ultimately  fail. 


RECENT  OPINIONS. 

While  alcoholic  stimulants  are  recognized  as  property,  aad  en* 
dtled  to  the  protection  of  law,  ownership  in  them  is  subject  to 
such  restraints  as  are  demanded  by  the  highest  conaitlerations  of 
public  expediency.  Such  enactments  are  regarded  as  police  regu- 
lations, established  for  the  prevention  of  pauper.sm  and  crime,  for 
the  abatement  of  nuisances,  and  the  promotion  of  public  health  and 
safety.  They  are  a just  restraint  of  an  injurious  use  of  property 
which  the  legislature  has  authority  to  impose,  and  the  extent  to 
which  such  interference  may  be  carried  mast  rest  exclusively  in 
legislative  wisdom,  where  it  is  not  controlled  by  fundamental  law. 
It  is  a settled  principle,  essential  to  the  rights  of  self-pres6rvatioii 
in  every  organized  community,  that,  however  absolute  may  be  th* 
owner’s  title  to  his  property,  he  holds  it  under  the  implied  condi- 
tion “ that  its  use  shall  not  work  injury  to  the  equal  enjoyment 
and  safety  of  others  who  have  an  equal  right  to  the  enjoyment  of 
their  property,  nor  be  injurious  to  the  community.” — Supremt 
Court,  Ne-U)  Jemey,  1872. 

While  some  doubt  the  -wisdom  A prohibition,  it  has  been  so 
often  and  so  emphatically  approved  by  the  people  that  it  may  b« 
regarded  as  a part  of  the  settled  policy  of  the  State.  The  law  of 
the  last  legislature,  making  it  the  duty  of  sheriffs  and  their  de- 
puties to  institute  legal  proceedings  against  violations  of  the  laws 
prohibiting  the  sale  of  intoxicating  liquors,  has  secured  a more 
effective  enforcement  of  these  laws.  The  effects  are  perceptible 
in  the  decrease  of  drunkenness,  and  consequently  in  less  arrests 
on  that  account,  in  the  reduction  of  criminal  business  generally, 
and  in  thousands  of  comforts  and  blessings  brought  to  homes 
where  poverty  and  misery  reigned  before.  If  it  be  said  that  it 
has  destroyed  an  important  business,  and  left  the  venders  of  li- 
quor without  employment  and  their  shops  unoccupied,  it  is  an- 
swered that  the  money  formerly  paid  to  support  their  business  hat 
been  tv;rned  into  other  and  more  useful  channels  of  trade,  or  into 
the  families  of  those  whose  hard-earned  money  supported  tha 
tra£5c.  — Governor  Ferham,  Maine,  Annual  Message,  187S. 


THE 


FllClTS  OF  THE  LIQUOR  TRAFFIC, 

AKD 

THE  KESULTS  OF  PROHIBITIOI? . 


BY  SUSnSEK  STEBCrXS,  M.D. 

In  estimating  the  results  of  a law  prohibiting  the  sale  of  intoxicating 
beverages,  the  thought  that  first  suggests  itself  to  the  mind  is,  that 
Buch  a law  can  do  no  possible  harm,  if  the  traffic  is  an  evil  that  ought 
to  be  suppressed.  I might  very  jfistly  assume  it  to  be  sueli  an  evil,  and 
proceed  at  once  to  show  the  good  results  of  prohibition  wherever  it 
has  been  established ; hut  that  I may  be  the  more  practical  and  useful 
in  what  I have  to  say,  I must  refer  briefly  to  the  thing  itself  which 
demands  prohibition.  I am  fully  aware  that  the  evils  of  intemperance, 
and  the  criminality  of  all  license  laws,  have  been  set  forth  repeatedly 
by  abler  pens  than  mine;  at  the  same  time,  I am  as  fully  convinced 
than  an  adequate  exposition  has  never  been  made.  The  exposition  I 
desire  may  be  far  beyond  the  reach  and  comijass  of  human  cajiacity. 
It  may  seem  presumptuous  in  me  to  touch  a subject  which  has  proved 
an  over-match  to  some  of  the  greatest  intellects  of  the  world.  Such 
would  be  the  case  if  I were  to  attempt  a full  and  satisfactory  revelation 
of  the  evil.  I shall  make  no  such  vain  attempt.  But  as  a prelude  to 
what  has  been  effected  by  prohibition,  I wish  the  reader  to  glance  at  a 
few  of  -the  hideous  fruits  of  license  from  my  stand-point,  after  forty 
years’  study  of  the  subject.  That  it  is  an  evil  of  gigontic  proportions, 
is  admitted  by  all.  The  more  candid  and  truthful  of  the  liquor  dealers 
themselves  admit  that  the  world  would  be  better  off  without  it.  It 
effectually  blocks  the  wheels  of  civilization ; it  stands  square  across  the 
path  of  every  good  cause. 

AN  ENEMY  TO  EDUCATION. 

The  most  important  interest  and  agency  in  our  free  Republic  is  our 
Bystem  of  district  schools.  From  the  reports  of  our  State  Superinten- 
dents, we  learn  that  there  are  very  nearly  if  not  quite  two  millions  of 
our  children,  of  suitable  age,  that  do  not  attend  school  regularly.  How 
is  that  to  be  accounted  for  ? Is  not  much  of  it  due  to  that  negligence 
on  tne  part  of  parents — fathers  especially — which  drinking  and  drunk- 
enness never  fail  to  engender  ? Whoever  knew  the  forlorn  children 
of  sots  to  attend  school  regularly  ? Our  common  schools  are  the  breath 
of  life  to  our  free  institutions;  yet,  sad  to  relate,  we  have  moie  than 
four  dram-shops  to  one  school.  Will  not  the  traffic  in  that,  which  is 
Um;  peculiar  antagonuer  of  knowledge  and  virtue,  forever  sap  and  mino 


'2  THE  FEUrrS  OF  THE  LIQUOR  TEAFFTO. 

and  nullify  the  good  effects  of  our  schools?  Will  it  not  etemslly  ravel 
out  the  little  morality  that  is  inwoven  by  education  ? It  does  more. 
It  obstructs  the  road  to  the  school-house,  and  effectually  bars  its  doors 
against  the  unfortunate  children  of  the  drunkard.  It  strips  them  of 
decent  clothing,  robs  them  of  necessary  text-books,  and  turns  them 
famished  and  destitute  in  mind  and  body  into  the  highways  and  by- 
wa.vs  of  vagrancy,  loaferism,  and  vice. 

The  liquor  traffic  tempts  parents  to  inebriety,  and  a useless  waste  of 
their  time  and  means,  which  falls  with  a deadly  blight  upon  the  minds 
of  their  dependent  offspring.  As  has  been  well  said;  ‘‘The  ignorance 
of  tlie  drink  custom  is  not  simple  ignorance;  it  li.is  a density,  a dark- 
ness, and  a depravity  peculiarly  its  own.  It  is  ignorance,  vice-incrusted 
and  stereotyped.”  The  Rev.  Dr.  McKerrow,  in  a speech  at  Edinburgh, 
said  : “It  should  be  borne  in  mind  that  the  publican  is  an  educator  as 
well  as  the  schoolmaster  ; that  the  beer-shop  or  the  gin-.-hop  is  a place 
in  which  instruction  of  a certain  kind  is  received,  as  well  as  at  the 
grammar-school.  They  are  confessedly  training,  not  merely  teaching.’’ 
The  London  Morning  affirms  that  “ the  beer-shop  is  the 

school  of  the  poor  man,  and  its  games  and  frivolities  form  the  only 
system  of  education  he  is  likely  to  recognize.  If  the  destinies  of  the 
rising  generation  are  left  to  the  chances  of  such  an  education,  what 
must  be  the  result?  If  such  are  the  fathers,  what  will  be  the  children?” 
Let  the  number  of  juvenile  offenders  answer.  Ignorance,  with  its 
sightless  orbs,  groping  through  a beamless  cbao.s,  has  more  to  dread 
from  the  licensed  dram-shop  than  to  hope  for  in  the  district  school. 

The  thrones  of  European  despots  are  flanked  and  guarded  by  cannon 
and  bayonets— here,  truth,  reason,  and  justice  are  tlie  pillars  of  our 
republican  system.  It  follows  that  whatever  obstructs  equal  universal 
education,  of  the  best  kind  possible,  is  an  evil  that  threatens  the  very 
life  of  the  nation.  It  matters  not  how  many  or  costly  the  school- 
houses  we  build,  orliow  many  and  competent  the  teachers  wo  emi)loy — 
it  matters  not  how  many  of  the  appliances  we  furnish  or  wliat  the 
means  used,  the  general  education  of  the  rising  and  future  generations 
is  an  utter  impossibility  in  connection  with  a legalized  liquor  traffic. 
All  hope  of  that  glory  and  blessing  to  our  race  im»st  be  abandoned,  if 
that  curse  of  curses  is  to  remain.  Surely  our  school  laws  and  license 
lawsdo  not  look  well  on  the  same  statute  book.  They  do  not  harmo- 
nize, and  one  or  the  other  should  be  repealed.  At  present  we  are  pull- 
ing down  witli  one  hand  what  we  are  trying  to  build  up  with  the  other. 
Why  should  we  incur  the  trouble  and  expense  of  educating  our  chil- 
dren if  they  are  to  be  made  sots  in  dens  authorized  bv  government! 
NoU  ess  than  half  a million  of  the  male  pupils  of  our  aistrict  schools 
■will  become  human  wrecks  ir  the  course  of  the  next  ten  years,  if  the 
license  laws  of  the  several  States  are  not  abolished.  The  necessity  of 
total  abstinence  as  a rn’e  of  life  should  be  inculcated  in  every  school, 
as  it  is  of  more  consequence  to  the  future  welifare  of  each  pupil  than 
any  one  or  all  the  brandies  now  taught,  .’t  is  also  the  special  duty  of 


AND  THE  KESiJLTS  OF  PEOHIBITIOH. 


s 


State  and  county  superintendents,  together  with  all  teachers,  male  and 
female,  to  protest  earnestly  against  that  which  .3  constantly  subverting 
their  best  endeavors. 


A FOE  TO  RELIGION. 

It  is  a well-known  fact  that  not  more  than  one  in  eight  (?)  of  mil 
people  are  in  the  habit  of  attending  places  of  religious  worship.  Would 
tl.at  be  the  case  if  the  drink  demon  was  banished?  AVhat  hope  have 
we  of  a change  for  the  better  while  that  demon  impedes  the  way  tc 
the  church?  It  not  only  keeps  millions  from  tiie  sound  of  the  Gospel, 
out  it  annually  drags  down  and  bemires  thousands  of  communicantg, 
who,  if  tills  stumbling-block  was  removed,  rvould  be  worthy  and  ex* 
emplary  members.  The  church  has  no  enemy  out  of  perdition  itself 
equal  to  a law-protected  liquor  traffic.  In  proof  of  this  I might  qiict« 
volumes  of  testimony  from  the  most  eminent  divines.  Such  a task  is 
quite  unnecessary.  All  must  see  and  realize  that  a license  law  is  the 
most  efficient  and  formidable  weapon  in  the  hands  of  Satan  and  liis 
followers  that  has  ever  been  invented.  It  is,  in  gamblers’  plirase,  their 
trump  card — their  right  bowser.  So  long  as  this  is  not  wuested  froia 
them,  they  may  defy  the  armies  of  the  faithful,  and  iiei-petiiate  theu 
malign  dominion  on  this  planet.  This  truth  should  sink  deep  into  the 
hearts  of  all — the  blessed  reign  of  the  Saviour  will  not ; and  without  such 
a miracle  as  we  have  no  reason  to  expect,  can  not  be  the  happy  lot  of 
mortals  here  until  the  drink  demon  is  cast  out.  We  may  pray  for  the 
coming  of  His  kingdom,  but  it  is  idle  to  expect  it  while  we  are  too 
lazy  or  too  selfish  to  prepare  the  way  by  tlie  dethronement  of  King 
Alcohol.  It  will  not  come,  nor  can  “ His  wall  be  done  on  earth  as  it  is 
in  lieaven”  until  this  fountain  of  moral  pollution  is  dried  up.  There 
are  more  than  twenty-five  millions  of  unconverted  souls  in  the  United 
States,  and  the  number  of  such  will  continue  to  increase  until  this 
insurmountable  obstruction  to  their  salvation  is  removed.  That  right- 
eousness which  exalteth  a nation  will  be  kept  in  everlasting  abeyance 
unless  this  source  of  unnatural  and  unnecessary  depravity  is  eradicated. 
Its  eradication  is  plainly  the  first  and  paramount  duty  of  the  church, 
a duty  tliat  could  be  very  speedily  accomplished  by  united  and  vigor- 
ciis  action. 

Let  the  great  evangelical  chnrclies  adopt  the  Pledge  as  a rule  of  dkei- 
pliue,  and  success  would  be  certain.  Ever}''  church  member  sliouid  l>s 
8,  total  abstainer,  an  advocate  for,  and  a pattern  of  temperance.  Such 
I am  sorry  to  say,  is  not  the  fact.  I am  but  too  happy  to  acknowledge 
that  tlicre  are  religious  organizations  in  connection  wdlli  the  Presby- 
terian, Congregational,  and  Baptist  denominations,  that  require  their 
menibers  td  assent  to  a pledge  of  total  abstinence  from  intoxicating 
beverages.  Could  their  noble  example  be  followed  by  the  'W'hole  Chiis- 
tian  church,  an  overwhelming  host  would  be  marshaled  on  the  sida 
of  right,  having  power  to  banish  the  drink  fashion,  together  with  all 
taws  which  protect  it,  and  thus  bid  the  human  intellect  move  in.  Let 


4 


THE  FRUITS  OF  THE  LIQUOR  TRAFFIC, 


every  professing  Christian  become  an  earnest  teetotaler,  and,  oh.  vrhel 
a change  would  hurst  on  our  enraptured  vision ! The  drearj^  night  of 
intemperance  would  break  into  a fairer  and  brighter  morning  than  ever 
dawned  on  earth’s  inhabitants ! I rejoice  to  know  that  a respectable 
portion  of  the  best  membere  of  our  churches  arc  also  members  of  tem- 
perance societies;  but,  unfortunateh^  they  are  forced  to  go  outside  of 
theii  ledgious  organizations  to  get  into  a strictly  total  abstinence  associ- 
Jticn.  So  long  as  this  is  the  case,  there  is  reason  to  fear  that  a license  lav? 
ivil!  be  more  popular  than  a prohibitory  law.  Could  the  ten  millioH 
«h  arch  members  of  the  country  all  become  earnest  and  consistent  frien'la 
of  temperance,  Christianity,  intelligence,  virtue,  liberty,  and  jiistie# 
would  make  more  progress  in  the  next  fifty  j'ears  than  has  been  wit- 
nessed since  the  downfall  of  the  Roman  Empire. 

The  church  has  now  within  its  fold  a million  citizens,  who  are  an- 
nually giving  their  suffrages  to  candidates  for  the  different  State  legisla- 
tors who  are  the  frieuds  and  sustainers  of  license  laws.  Let  these  be 
simply  withheld  from  all  such,  and  the  thing  is  done.  If  the  Christiana 
of  the  country  desire  a prohibitory  law,  they  can  have  it.  It  is  not 
necessary  to  enter  the  political  arena  by  organizing  a political  temper- 
ance party ; though  that  is  purely  a question  of  expediency,  to  be  deter- 
mined by  themselves.  For  the  present,  in  most  of  the  State.s,  they 
have  onl}'  to  stand  manfully  aloof,  and  refuse  to  vote  for  legislators  who 
are  for  license  and  against  prohibition.  When  the  iioliticians  come  to 
see  that  there  are  a million  voters,  or  even  half  that  number,  in  the  Unit- 
ed States  whose  votes  can  not  be  had  except  on  condition  that  the 
voters  themselves  shall  receive  such  protection  as  civil  government  is 
designed  to  afford,  be  assured  their  just  demand  will  be  complied  with. 
In  the  mean  time  let  all  resolve,  that  come  what  may  to  the  parties 
with  which  they  have  heretofore  been  connected,  they  will  not  con- 
tinue to  steep  their  souls  in  guilt  by  voting  for  law-makers  who  are  not 
outspoken  opponents  of  a liquor  license.  Let  them  bear  in  mind  that 
the  horrible  evil  is  now,  and  ever  has  been,  upheld  by  the  votes  of 
professed  temperance  men  and  professing  Christians,  and  that  they 
have  only  to  stand  from  under  and  let  it  fall.  The  world  is  in  a slough 
of  alcoholic  debasement;  the  energies  of  the  wise  and  good  are  para- 
lyzed by  it.  The  church  has  power  to  roll  away  the  stone  from  our 
mora.  sepulcher,  and  bid  humanity  rise  and  go  forth  with  a force  and 
grandeur  unknown  to  the  race.  Will  she  do  it?  or  will  she  fold  hei 
arms  and  permit  the  tide  of  iniquitv'  to  surge  on? 

IT  BLIGHTS  OUR  CHILDREN. 

There  is  an  old  proverb  which  says,  “ If  you  let  rum  alone  it  will  let 
vou  alone.”  The  mere  tact  that  it  was  ever  accepted  as  truth,  and 
passed  current  as  such,  is  a striking  evidence  of  a general  and  deplor- 
able delusion.  So  darkened  is  the  human  understanding  in  regard  to 
die  effect  of  the  drink  custom,  that  many  are  unable  to  discover  the  deep 
^juries  it  inflicts  on  those  who  scrupulously  avoid  the  custom,  and  on 
fkose  who  are  too  young  to  indulge  in  it  They  do  not  appear  to  SM 


AKD  THE  RESULTS  OF  PROHIBITION.  8 

that  »ne  toper  in  a family  is  enough  to  destroy  the  peace  and  happiness  o! 
every  member  of  it,  and  often  of  others  in  his  immediate  neiglit)orhood. 
What  is  equally  strange  and  lamentable,  they  do  not  i)erceive  the  uttei 
lack  of  security,  to  the  lives,  property,  and  well-being  of  a community,  sc 
long  as  there  is  a class  of  crazy-headed  tipplers  in  it.  The  more  observant 
temiKjrance  men  and  women  are  aw'ake  to  this  truth,  and  they  feel  its 
lenible  force  constantlj^  and  intensely.  Hence  their  irrepressible  desir? 
for  some  measure  of  defense  and  protection  against  the  ever-reciirr:ns 
end  ever-impending  danger.  It  is  this  daily  atllictiou,  and  continual 
dread  of  what  may  happen,  that  causes  such  a clamor  for  relief,  and 
which  has  finally  resolved  itself  into  a steady  demand  for  a prohibitory 
law.  In  the  nature  of  things,  this  demand,  so  obviously  just,  can  uevei 
cease  until  its  object  is  attained.  It  is  the  unotfending  but  deeply  out- 
raged sober  class  that  call  earnestly  for  it,  as  a means  of  protection 
from  the  unprovoked  aggressions  of  topers  and  sots.  They  feel  and 
know  that  the  first  and  principal  object  of  government  is  jrrotection — 
protection  to  the  lives,  the  earnings,  the  peace,  and  comfort  of  each 
individual  It  was  for  this  that  governments  were  instituted.  If  the 
safety  of  the  sober,  the  industrious,  the  useful,  and  the  helpless  can 
not  be  secured  against  the  assaults  of  the  profligate  and  vicious,  then 
goverrment  itself  is  an  expensive  sham  and  a useless  burden. 

Among  the  abused  ones  that  appeal  to  our  tenderest  sympathies  and 
awaken  our  deepest  compassion  are  the  neglected  children  of  the 
drunki,rd.  We  can  not  be  idle  spectators  of  their  oft  forsaken  and 
pitiful  condition.  We  have  no  right  to  permit  the  numerous  afflictions 
thej-  are  compelled  to  endure.  Our  very  manhood  should  prompt  us 
to  rush  to  their  rescue.  What  we  can  rightfully  do  for  their  relief,  we 
are  cowardly  as  well  as  criminal  for  not  doing.  A child  has  no  con- 
trol over  the  conduct  of  its  parents,  yet  how  much  of  the  coloring  of  the 
whole  long  life  of  that  child  will  depend  upon  the  sobriety  or  drunken- 
ness of  its  father?  We  have  laws  to  shield  children  from  abuse,  but  a 
license  law  nullifies  them  all.  The  state  should  be  their  guardian, 
but  it  scoui'ges  them  with  fathers  made  cruel  and  heartless  in  govern- 
ment dram-shops  — its  peculiar  institutions.  Alcohol  is  the  only 
substance  in  nature  that  can  extinguish  parental  affection,  and  this 
dehumanizing  agent  men  are  legalized  to  peddle  out  to  such  as  have 
dependent  little  ones  in  charge ! What  a horrid  perversion  of  law 
W hat  an  outrage  upon  humanity  ? Oh,  shameful  legislators  ! Do  you 
not  blush  for  your  deeds  when  you  contemplate  the  result  in  the  cold 
and  hunger,  in  the  filth  and  disease,  the  lingering  tortures  and  heart 
piercing  cries  of  your  baby  victims  ? Think  of  the  millions  of  su(;h 
festering  in  our  cities,  pining  from  want  in  our  villages,  and  suffering 
everj'’wl:''re  by-  the  presence  of  rum.  Think  not  to  escape  the  burning 
brand  your  atrocities  merit.  If  the  poor  drunkard  can  not  enter  the 
abode  of  the  pure  and  the  just,  what  chance  is  there  for  drunkard 
maiers,  especially  for  the  worst  of  all  drunkard  makers,  the  framer? 
and  sustainers  of  our  license  laws  ? 


6 


THE  FRUITS  OF  THE  LIQUOR  TRAFFIC, 


IT  MURDERS  OUR  WOMER. 

Though  the  evil  spares  none,  there  are  four  classes  especially  ifh* 
Buffer  from  intemperance  ; 1st.  The  drunkards  themselves,  who  num- 
ber at  this  time  about  a million  in  the  United  States.  2d.  The  soltei 
men  of  the  country,  who  are  exposed  to  all  kinds  of  violence  and  out- 
rage from  their  drunken  neighbors,  besides  having  to  raise  annually  s 
vast  amount  of  taxes,  which  go  to  build  poor-houses  aud  jails,  and  t» 
support  the  paupers  and  criminals  made  by  the  drink  custom.  3i. 
The  children  of  the  drunkards,  before  alluded  to,  who  may  be  fairly 
BCt  down  at  two  millions  of  innocent  and  helpless  victims  whose  inju- 
ries from  drunken  fathers  in  an  infinite  variety  of  ways  can  be  estima- 
ted only  by  the  infinite  mind  of  God  himself.  And  4th.  The  women 
of  the  nation,  who  are  so  unfortunate  as  to  be  the  mothers,  wives,  sis- 
ters, and  daughters  of  hopeless  drunkards,  a host  of  guiltless  sufferers, 
amounting  at  a moderate  calculation  to  at  least  three  millions.  It  is 
of  this  last  class  that  I would  speak  now.  The  consumption  of  alco- 
holic beverages  is  confined  almost  entirely  to  men.  But  few  women 
can  be  found,  except  in  the  very  highest  and  the  very  lowest  circles, 
that  ever  use  them.  Notwithstanding  their  almost  universal  abstinence, 
they  suffer  more  from  this  vice  than  from  all  other  evils  combined. 

The  drunkenness  of  men  has  been  the  most  prolific  source  of  female 
misery  for  ages  past.  Reflect  upon  that  immense  load  of  grief  and 
anguish  that  falls  with  crushing  weight  upon  the  gentler  sex  in  our 
country  1 Think  of  the  millions  that  have  been  the  innocent  victims 
of  intemperate  connections,  that  have  toiled  and  striven,  and  hoped 
and  prayed,  until  a cold,  sad  despair  has  fastened  upon  their  hearts! 
IVIisery  is  a slow  murderer;  but  how  often  has  its  vulture  tooth  sunk 
deep  into  the  female  breast  in  consequence  of  the  neglect,  harshness, 
and  abuse  which  daily  spring  from  intoxication,  until  death  itself  has 
beeome  a blessed  relief ! 

Who  has  not  seen  a lovely  }mung  female,  reared  in  the  arms  of 
parental  tenderness,  her  heart  swelling  with  the  delusive  hopes  of  in- 
experience, led  forward  into  connubial  life  with  prospects  as  bright  and 
unclouded  as  a summer  morning  ? Again,  have  you  not  marked  the 
fitful  melancholy,  the  fading  cheek,  and  the  anxious  looks  which  told 
that  agonizing  suspicions  as  to  him  in  whom  centered  all  her  hope* 
and  afl'ections,  were  busy  at  her  heart,  until  the  fatal  truth  burst  uj-  on 
her  as  she  found  herself  fettered  to  pollution  and  clasped  in  the  arms 
jf  living  death  embodied  in  a dnmken  husband!  She  struggled  on. 
against  cruel  disappointment,  degradation,  and  anguish  tmtil  a kindly 
consumption  geutly  led  her  fi'om  earthl}"  suffering  to  a prematuro 
grave!  Her  circling  Idndred  and  friends  poured  forth  the  tears  of  a 
Biitigated  grief  as  they  beheld  this  innocent  victim  of  another’s  guilt 
released  at  length  from  the  pangs  of  tortured  affection  and  consigned 
to  that  nairow  bed 

“ Where  lowly  grief  and  lordly  pride 
Lie  down  like  brothers  side  by  sida” 


AND  THE  RESULTS  OF  PKOHIBrnON. 


Such  cases  are  not  unfrequent  in  respectable  families.  Take  the 
following  sketch,  which,  with  some  modifications  and  interpolations, 
was  drawn  by  the  master-hand  of  the  Hon.  Edward  Everett.  “ A 
wcalthjf  drunkard  may  have  self-control  enough  to  manage  his 
property,  and  lioiiesty  enough  to  keep  out  of  jail,  lie  may  fill  what 
is  called  a genteel  atatiou  in  society,  and  yet  he  may  be  the  veiy  t3U'ant 
of  his  household,  never  pleased,  never  soothed,  never  gratified,  whes 
ths  utmost  has  been  done  by  everybody  to  gratify  him,  often  turbn- 
lect  and  outrageous,  sometimes  cruel,  the  terror  of  those  he  is  bound 
to  protect,  the  shame  of  those  who  would  love  him  if  they  could.  A 
creature  of  this  sort  does  not  take  refuge  in  the  poor-house,  or  drive 
his  family  to  it,  but  the  coarsest  and  hardest  crust  broken  within  its 
walls  is  a dainty  compared  wdtli  the  luxuries  of  his  cheerless  table. 
Such  is  the  effect  of  iutemperauce  in  the  families  of  those  who  are 
otherwise  w^ell  off.” 

Look  now  for  a moment  at  its  effect  upon  the  poor.  There  is  in 
every  community  an  honest  dread  of  the  poor-house.  But  the  poverty 
out  of  the  poor-house  produced  by  intemperance  is  greater  in  the 
amount  of  suffering  w'hich  it  occasions  than  the  poverty  in  the  poor- 
house.  To  the  victims  of  drflnkenness  wlioin  it  lias  conducted  to  this 
sad  refuge  one  bitter  ingredient  in  the  cup  is  spared.  The  sense  of  hon- 
est shame  and  the  struggles  of  a commendable  pride  are  at  length  over. 
They  can  sink  no  low'er,  and  may  possibly  become  reconciled  to  their 
hard  lot.  Now,  take  a case  offrequeut  occurrence  outside  the  poor-house. 

“ Suppose  the  man  a hard-workiug  mechanic  or  laborer,  the  woman 
an  industrious  housewife,  with  a family  to  be  supported  by  their 
uniicd  labor  and  economy.  The  man,  as  the  phrase  is,  takes  to  drink. 
What  happens  ? The  consequence  is,  the  cost  of  the  liquor  is  taken 
from  his  earnings,  which  were  before  barely  adequate  for  their  sup- 
port. They  have  no  luxuries,  and  must  pinch  themselves  in  the  neces- 
saries of  life.  The  old  clothes,  already  worn  out,  must  be  worn 
longer ; the  daily  fare,  none  too  good  at  the  beginning,  becomes  daily 
more  scanty.  Tlie  leak  in  the  roof,  for  want  of  a nail,  a shingle,  or  a 
bit  of  board,  becomes  wider  every  wdnter.  The  number  of  panes  of 
broken  glass,  w’hose  place  is  supplied  by  old  hats  and  rags,  daily  in 
creases;  not  so  tlie  wmod-pile,  which  no  longer  keeps  out  the  winter's 
cold.  Ere  long,  the  children  are  kept  from  school,  for  want  of  books 
Slid  .shoes ; and  at  length  the  wretclied  wife  and  children  are  ashamed 
fip  show  tliemselves  abroad.  Things  grow  wmrse  and  worse;  the  head 
of  the  family  earns  less  and  less,  and  of  this  little  spends  more  and 
more  for  liquor.  This  may  go  on  for  years ; but  see  at  length  to  what 
they  are  reduced ! Look  into  this  hovel  wdien  he  comes  home  on  a 
8 It  urday  evening.  Here  will  not  be  found  the  cotter’s  blessed  Saturday 
mght,  so  beautifully  described  by  Burns — a picture  of  domestic  life 
that  might  be  realized  by  tlie  poorest  sober  man  in  America.  No;  a 
far  different  scene  presents  itself.  “The  father  and  head  of  the  family 
may  not  be  staggering  drunk,  but  in  a worse  condition ; he  is  heated 


8 


THE  FTilTITS  OF  THE  LIQTJOK  TEAFFIO, 

■with  liqnor,  and  craves  more.  His  week’s  wages  are  already  sqnan. 
derel.  Listen  to  tlie  brutal  clamors,  accompanied  by  threats  and 
oaths,  with  whicli  he  demands  of  his  hrmily  the  food  which  they  hay* 
been  unable  to  procure,  either  for  themselves  or  for  him.  See  the  peot 
grown-up  children — boys  and  girls — perhaps  young  men  and  women, 
old  enough  to  feel  the  shame  as  well  as  the  misery  of  their  heritage- 
without  a spark  of  youthful  cheerfulness  in  their  e}'es,  silent  and  terr 
Bed,  creeping,  supperless  for  the  night,  to  their  forlorn  garret,  to  escap*. 
outrage,  curses,  and  blows!  Watch  the  heart-broken  wife,  as  witt 
countemince  haggard  with  care  and  want  she  seeks  in  vain  to  hush 
the  cries  of  a hungry  babe ; and  then  return  in  the  morning,  and  nuJ 
he:  blood  and  the  infant’s  wet  upon  the  hearthstone.”  This  is  no 
imaginary  picture,  but,  in  some  of  its  features,  one  of  almost  daily  oc- 
currence ; yet  we  heed  them  not,  or  doze  over  them  with  cold  and  ig- 
noble apathy. 

In  revievung  the  evils  of  intemperance,  it  will  not  do,  I repeat,  to  confine 
our  attention  to  those  who  drink,  and  to  those  who  meeklj'and  sheepishly 
pay  the  ta.xes  occasioned  by  the  poverty  and  crime  which  come  from 
drinking.  The  principal  sufferers  .are  thg  women  and  children  of  the 
country,  who  themselves  never  touch  the  debasing  stuff.  The  keenest 
pangs  and  the  sharpest  .agonies  are  endured  by  the  mothers,  wives,  sisters, 
and  daughters  of  the  wretched  sots  with  which  our  country  abounds. 
Says  the  eloquent  Dr.  Kitchell : “ Much  of  this  is  concealed  from  the 
public  gaze  as  long  as  concealment  is  possible.  Back  of  the  visible 
ravages  of  intemperance,  and  deeper  than  all  these,  there  lies  a field 
of  devastation  which  has  never  been  fully  explored,  and  can  never  be 
more  than  partially  reported.  It  is  the  wasted  realm  of  the  social  af- 
fections, the  violated  sanctuary  of  domestic  peace.”  It  is  here  that  the 
higher  and  inner  life  of  woman  is  marred  and  tortured,  her  most 
sacred  and  cherished  affections  crushed  and  blighted.  These  are  pri- 
vate sorrows,  that  her  most  intim.ate  confidant  must  not  know,  so 
anxious  is  she  to  sustain  the  good  character  of  her  husband,  brother, 
or  son.  “ But  from  this  inner  world  of  suppressed  wretchedness  there 
will  occiisionally  burst  forth  to  the  ear  of  human  pity'  a piercing  cry 
of  tliose  who  writhe  under  the  slow  torments  of  a desolate  heart  and 
dying  hope.  Yet  all  this  which  meets  the  eye  and  pains  the  car  is  but 
the  overflow  of  misery.  It  is  merely  what  inadvertently  escape* 
through  chasms  violently  rent  open,  and  tells  sadly  of  a sea  of  angu'sb 
that  is  stifled  forever  in  its  secret  recesses.  The  bursting  hearts  of  lu.e  'h 
«rs  for  their  ruined  sons;  of  wives  from  whose  life  ail  joy  and  hope,  it 
Jove  and  tenderness  has  been  blotted  out;  of  daughters’  shame,  crushed 
»ncl  doomed  to  penury  and  disgrace — could  we  look  on  all  these  grief- 
stricken  females,  some  of  whom  have  been  well  off,  happy,  and 
respected,  now  doomed  to  brutality  and  want,  each  with  her  own 
peculi.ar  history  of  woe,  we  should  ask  no  further  witness  to  the  heiuoui 
guilt  of  the  rum  traffic,  or  the  righteousness  of  taw  against  the  destroyei 
of  all  these.” 


and  the  restjxts  of  peohibttion. 


9 


Thou  shalt  not  kill,  is  an  imperative  injunction  of  the  moral  and 
»lvine  law.  How  precious  a thing  is  humiin  life ! how  ample  and 
magnificent  the  provisions  made  for  its  sustenance  and  preservation 
For  it  the  earth  is  clotlied  witli  verdure  and  the  planets  travel  tncii 
rcunds.  Yet  how  often  and  how  thoughtlessly  is  it  destroyed!  A 
Sian  may  kill  his  wife  by  a long  course  of  outrageous  treatment  and 
brutal  behavior,  and  he  may  have  an  accomplice  in  the  person  ot 
/seme  saloon  or  tavern  keeper,  and  the  communit}'^  will  sleej)  over  tb< 
Simnnous  crime.  Can  this  be  right?  And  if  not  right,  how  long 
must  it  continue  ? Look  for  a moment  at  the  magnitude  of  this  evil  I 
As  1 before  remarked,  we  have  in  the  Union  one  million  of  drunkai'ds, 
two  millions  of  the  chikh-en  of  drunkards,  with  not  less  than  three 
millions  of  females  who  are  so  closely  related  to  these  drunkards  as 
to  be  the  victims  of  their  vices  and  the  partakers  of  their  woes.  Of 
this  million  of  inebriates  it  is  calculated  that  sixty  thousand  die  an- 
nually. Now,  let  the  mind  go  back  for  centuries,  and  comprehend 
if  you  can,  this  fathomless  and  shoreless  sea  of  anguish.  Could  wa 
group  together  for  ages  gone  by  the  annual  sacrifice  of  human  beings, 
until  we  should  have  collected  into  one  great  multitude  the  hecatombs 
of  King  Alcohol ; could  we,  in  addition  to  this  countless  multitude,  call 
up  from  their  sepulchers  the  grief-stricken  mothers,  the  misery-mur- 
dered wives,  the  sorrow-blighted  sisters  and  daughters  of  all  these 
wretched  suicides,  our  conceptions  would  still  fall  far  short  of  the 
awful  reality.  Our  mental  vision  would  have  to  reach  back  to  the 
deluge,  if  not  to  creation’s  dawn,  and  embrace  every  quarter  of  the 
habitable  globe ; it  would  be  obliged  to  people  the  earth  with  skeleton 
witnesses  more  numerous  than  all  the  tribes  of  living  men  ; and  even 
then,  after  having  brought  into  view  this  vast  appalling  host,  we 
should  still  have  but  a feeble  conception  of  the  aching  hearts,  the 
bitter  moans,  the  bodily  throes,  and  the  mental  agony  which  they 
were  made  to  endure  before  they  sank  to  untimely  graves. 

How  ready  and  how  easy  is  the  remedy  for  all  this ! Let  every 
man,  woman,  and  child  (except  the  hopeless  sot)  form  themselves  into 
temperance  associations,  of  wdiatever  kind  is  most  agreeable  to  their 
tastes,  and  continue  faithful  to  the  principle  of  total  abstinence  for  the 
space  of  one  generation,  and  the  tiling  is  accomplished.  Can  that 
man  be  a true  friend  to  the  female  sex  who  will  not  do  this  much  to 
dry  up  their  tears  ? Surely  not,  and  he  should  not  be  so  considered. 
He  may  flatter  as  he  will,  but  no  true  woman  should  give  him  her 
trast  or  confidence.  He  is  not  a friend  but  an  enemy,  and  should  b* 
regarded  If  such  is  the  character  of  the  man  who  keeps  himself 
a.  'of  from  the  temperance  societies  of  the  country,  what  must  be  said 
of  all  the  women  in  the  land  who  are  equally  hostile  or  inditferent  to 
such  associations  ? Perhaps  they  do  not  know  that  they  can  in  this 
way  confer  an  incalculable  benefit  upon  their  suffering  sisters,  and 
upon  the  living  and  unborn  millioirs  of  both  sexes.  But  if  the}'  ould 
be  ones  brought  to  consider  the  subject,  there  could  be  no  difierencs 


10 


THE  FRUrrS  Oi?  TH.E  LIQUOR  TRAFFIC, 

«f  opinicn  among  them.  The  thing  is  too  plain,  too  self-evident,  foi 
controveray.  Let  all  who  would  remoTC  this  mountain  of  sorrow  lose 
no  time  in  doing  this  little  thing.  Let  those  who  would  he  looked 
npon  as  the  generous  friends  of  injured  innocence  manifest  their  fiieud- 
Rhip  by  putting  their  names  to  the  teetotal  pledge,  and  by  refusing 
ever  after  to  vote  for  a legislative  candidate  that  is  not  known  to  be 
ispposed  to  all  license  laws,  and  in  favor  of  prohibiting  an  evri  ii  om 
which  all  other  evils  are  hatched. 

Do  not  these  atSicted  women  appeal  to  every  fiber  of  our  manhood 
for  sjnnpathy  and  succor,  and  to  our  legislators  tor  adequate  relief? 
IIow  long  must  our  mothers,  wives,  sisters,  and  daughters  be  deprived 
of  that  protection  which  governments  were  organized  to  afford  ? Has 
lovely  woman  no  champion  among  the  immortal  heroes  of  the  Repub- 
lic ? Will  no  legislator  arise  that  can  set  forth  her  wrongs  in  a man- 
ner to  stir  the  Anglo-Saxon  blood  and  save  her  from  the  horrid  tor- 
tures of  a law-sheltered  rum  traffic  ? An  amaranthine  wreath  awaits 
him.  Its  leaves  of  endless  green  and  flowers  of  fadeless  beauty  will 
yet  be  clutched  by  the  hand  of  some  wise  and  chivalrous  statesman. 

IT  DESTROYS  NATIONAL  WE.ALTH. 

That  eminent  statistician.  Dr.  Hargraves,  of  Reading,  Pa.,  present 
as  with  the  following  facts  and  figures.  Tiiey  speak  for  themselves. 

“ By  the  census  of  18G0,  we  find  there  were  distilled,  in  the  United 
'States,  88,003,797  gallons  of  spirituous  liquors,  which  if  sold  by  the 
retailer  at  present  prices  would  bring  the  sum  of  .8610,020,579.  The 
same  year  there  were  brewed  5,115,140  barrels  of  fermented  liquors, 
which  at  present  retail  prices  would  bring  about  8123,000,000,  making 
a total  of  §739,030,579,  the  net  cost  of  spirituous  and  fermented  liquors 
that  paid  duty  to  the  Government,  to  say  nothing  of  the  wines  manu- 
factured, or  of  the  distilled  and  fermented  liquors  and  wines  imported. 

“ To  comprehend  clearly  the  magnitude  of  the  cost  of  intoxicating 
drinks,  let  us  go  one  step  farther  and  compare  its  cost  with  some  of  the 
necessary  productions  of  the  country.  By  the  census  of  1860,  we  find 
Hie  value  of  the  six  leading  productions  of  the  United  States  were . 


Flour  and  meal  §ae4.000.000 

Cotton  goods  115.000.000 

Boots  and  shoes  OO.OOO.IXX) 

Clothing 70.000.1100 

Woolen  goods 09.000.000 

Books,  newspapers,  and  job  printing 42.000  W 


Total $610,000,000 


“ The  *otal  cost  of  intoxicating  liquors  that  paid  duty  and  were  con* 
»umed  in  the  United  States,  was  §739,000.000,  or  in  roimd  numbers, 
one  hundred  and  twenty-nine  million  dollars  more  than  the  value  of 
all  the  flour,  cotton  goods,  boots,  shoes,  woolen  goods,  clothing,  ana 
printing  books,  newspapers,  and  other  printing  produced  in  the  United 
States  in  die  year  1860.  The  case  is  too  clear  to  need  comment  We 
have  seen  what  is  the  net  cost  of  intoxicating  drinks.  We  will  endea- 
vor to  arrive  at  the  total  proximate  cost. 


AifD  THE  RESULTS  OF  PROHIBITION. 


11 


The  actual  net  cost  of  liquors $739,020,579 

Time  lost  by  drinkin®,  half  as  much 3fi9..510.289 

Cost  of  crime  caused  oy  intemperance 87,800.000 

Cost  of  pauperism  “ “ 27.000.000 

Cost  of  litigation  “ “ 241,000.i)00 


Total  proximate  expenses  for  U.S $1,2-1(>,530,S08 


“ Tlie  civil  and  diplomatic  expenses  for  1862  tvere  $11,595,188  47 
Bad  for  1863,  $11,066,138  14.  Tims  tlie  people  tax  themselves  $728,- 
DOO,  )00  more  for  liquor  than  the  cost  of  the  United  States  Governmenl 
in  ordinary  times. 

In  an  editorial  article  published  in  the  New  York  Tribune,  Decem- 
ber 25th,  1867,  which  is  evidently  from  the  trenchant  pen  of  Mr. 
Greeley  himself,  we  have  a statement  of  the  annual  cost  of  liquor  con- 
sumed, together  with  some  of  its  concomitants,  which  varies  but  little 
from  the  figures  of  Dr.  Hargraves.  The  follotving  is  an  extract : 

“ The  M’hole  cost  of  liquors  annually  made  and  sold  in  the  United 
States,  that  is,  whisky  either  in  a pure  or  derivative  state,  is  about 
$500,000,000.  In  the  consumption  of  this  liquor,  60,000  lives  are  yearly 
destroyed,  100,000  men  and  women  are  sent  to  prison,  and  200,000 
children  are  bequeathed  to  poor-houses  and  charitable  institutions. 
In  addition,  300  murders  and  400  suicides  are  committed,  and  the  ex- 
pense connected  with  these  events  is  $200,000.  In  our  noble  State  of 
New  York,  of  course  including  the  city,  one  person  in  15  is  substan- 
tially made  a pauper.  Meanwhile,  large  sums  are  disbursed  in  erect- 
ing and  supervising  those  imposing  establishments,  the  common  jails 
and  the  penitentiaries,  for  so  far-reaching  are  the  effects  of  the  drink- 
ing of  spirituous  liquors,  that  our  citizens  are  enabled  to  violate  every 
law  of  the  land.” 

What  have  we  to  show  for  this  vast  annual  expenditure  ? A mere 
glance  at  the  result  would  fill  a volume.  That  being  no  part  of  my 
present  work,  we  will  look  for  a moment  at  one  fact  only.  60,000 
die  annually  ! A truthful  record  of  the  miseries  of  each  would  make 
60,000  biographies  every  year  ! That  number  of  such  sad  narratives 
will  never  be  written.  Even  a brief  notice  of  the  death  and  burial  of 
each  poor  creature  is  more  than  we  can  expect.  60,000  a year  is  more 
than  1,008  a week,  144  per  day,  6 for  every  hour,  and  1 for  every  ten 
minutes  1 Could  we  have  a bell  large  enough,  and  swinging  high 
enough  in  the  heavens  to  be  heard  over  the  entire  Union,  and  could  it 
be  tolled  every  ten  minutes  for  the  death  of  a drunkard,  its  mournful 
dirge  wo  dd  ring  in  our  ears  day  and  night  the  wlmle  3'ear  round.  It* 
sepulchrtd  notes  might  be  annoying  to  the  sustaiuers  of  license ; but  it 
■woulil  cause  them  to  realize  their  individual  responsibility  for  so  many 
frightful  and  untimely  deaths.  It  would  help  them  wonderfully  to  per- 
ceive their  ou  n personal  agency  in  the  horrible  work  of  blasting  the 
temporal  and  eternal  hopes  of  so  many  of  their  fellow-mortals. 

d’liere  an;  those  who  would  blame  the  drunkards  for  all  the  evils  of 
the  license  system.  Surely  they  are  neither  its  authors  nor  perpetua* 
tors.  They  are  only  its  ripe  and  rotten  fruit  They  did  not  originate 


12 


THE  FRUITS  OF  THE  LIQUOR  TRAFFIC, 


the  drink  fashion,  of  which  they  are  victims,  nor  the  law  that  fosters 
and  protects  it.  They  are  but  an  odious  excrescence,  its  natural  devel- 
opment, which  can  not  be  shaken  off.  Unfortunately,  they  are  the 
niost  unpopular  feature  of  it.  I say  unfortunate!}’,  for  surely  they  are 
not  the  worst.  In  an  essay  of  mine,  published  in  the  Boston  Nation,  3Iay 
4th,  18G7,  and  also  in  a Review  of  the  License  Law  of  Pennsylvania, 
1 proved  beyond  all  controversy,  that  moderate  drinking,  aside  from 
hs  tendency  to  excess,  is  productive  of  for  more  evil  in  the  worM  thsm 
drunkeiiuess  of  the  most  beastly  kind.  Rot  one  argument  in  tho-i* 
productions  has  ever  been  touched,  or  can  ever  be  refuted.  That,  so 
far  as  I am  informed,  opens  a new  chapter  in  the  philosophy  of  tem- 
perance. That  the  moderate  stage  of  the  drink  delirium  is  the  most 
dangerous  to  society,  should  be  known  to  all,  for  it  is  an  indisputabl« 
truth.  And  if  it  be  a truth,  what  ground  have  the  license  party,  who 
are  all  opposed  to  what  they  call  drunkenness,  to  stand  on  ? They 
acknowledge  drunkenness  to  be  an  evil,  and  would  banish  it  if  they 
could,  without  putting  a stop  to  moderate  drinking.  We  prove  that 
moderate  drinking,  if  kept  in  all  cases  within  the  bounds  of  what  they 
regard  as  moderation,  is  a greater  evil  than  drunkenness.  Row,  where 
are  they  ? We  acquit  them  of  desiring  drunkenness,  but  they  desire 
that  which  we  see  and  know  to  be  worse  than  drunkenness,  and  which 
in  addition  to  all  the  ills  of  moderate  intoxication  is  the  real  and  only 
cause  of  drunkenness. 

THE  RESULTS  OF  PROnTBITION. 

If  the  suppression  of  the  liquor  traffic  is  right,  the  results  of  a pro- 
hibitory law  must  be  good,  provided  it  has  any  effect  whatever  ; and 
if  it  has  no  effect,  it  can  do  no  possible  hann,  for  it  stands  not,  as  some 
may  suppose,  in  the  way  of  anything  better.  If  a license  law  ever 
operates  as  the  slightest  restraint  on  the  traffic  it  is  designed  to  “ regu- 
late,” it  is  because  of  its  prohibitory  clauses.  But  experience  proves 
that  they  can  not  be  enforced  in  connection  with  the  legal  traffic,  while 
the  very  objects  aimed  at  may  be  more  certainly  attained  by  a prohibit- 
ory law.  For  all  the  professed  aims  of  a license  law,  a prohibitor}-  law  ia 
preferably.  What  are  the  objects  of  what  is  called  “ a good  license  law  ?” 
1st.  To  authorize  a select  few,  of  good  mora.  character,  to  sell  liquor  to 
moderate-drinking  adults  only,  in  a quiet  and  orderly  manner.  2d.  IA 
forbid  its  sale  to  drunkards  and  minors.  3d.  To  stop  its  sale  entirely  ( a 
Sunday.  Such  are  its  main  objects,  without  going  further  into  detail 
Have  these  been  attained  by  means  of  a license  law  in  any  part  of  the 
world  ? Rever  ! and  from  the  veiy^  nature  of  things  they  never  ctiu  bd 

Under  a prohibitory  law  that  is  not  as  rigidly  enforced  as  it  she  tld  be, 
all  the  objects  aimed  at  by  a license  law  may  be  obtained.  Experience 
proves  that  in  any  locality  where  a prohibiton- law  exists,  and  where  pub- 
lic sentiment  is  unhappily  so  lax  as  not  to  require  the  entire  suppression 
of  Iram-drinkiug,  the  taw  is  used  to  regulate  the  traffic  and  moderate  the 
evil  to  a degree  that  has  never  been  accomplished  by  a license  law  of 
•ny  kind.  If  any  one  is  tolerated  to  sell  at  all,  he  sells  by  sufferance, 


AITD  THE  RESULTS  OF  PROHIBITION. 


13 


Mid  not  by  '.egal  right,  which  is  a very  different  thing.  He  mnst  be  a 
very  popular  citizen,  and  one  who  conducts  the  ti’afflc  in  a very 
guarded  and  discreet  manner.  He  knows  that  the  lav/,  like  the  sword 
of  Damocles,  is  susjiended  bj’'  a single  hair  over  his  head.  He  must 
be  one  who  will  not  deal  out  a drop  to  either  drunkard  or  minor,  cne 
who  keeps  a very  orderly  house,  that  is  closed  early  in  the  evening, 
snd  always  on  Sunday.  The  slightest  deviation  from  this  rule  is  fol- 
lowed by  the  confiscation  of  his  liquor  and  the  closing  of  nis  shop. 
Here  is  a state  of  affairs  the  desideratum  of  all  license  laws,  but  it  is 
what  no  license  law  ever  effected,  or  ever  can.  It  shows  that  a prohib- 
itory law  not  half  enforced  is  more  etficient  than  a license  law.  It  sliows 
that  the  objects  desired  by  the  more  respectable  portion  of  the  license 
party  themselves  are  secured  to  a greater  extent  in  a comnrunity  not 
ready  to  eradicate  the  traffic,  under  a proliibitory  law  than  under  a 
license  law.  Therefore  a prohibitory  law  that  is  not  strictly  enfcrced 
is  the  best  law,  moderate  license  men  being  judges,  that  can  be  enacted 
on  the  subject. 

All  experience  shows  that  a license  law  is  more  certain  to  be  evaded 
than  a prohibitory  law,  and  for  the  reason  that  the  section  that  author- 
izes the  sale  of  liquor  will  invariably  cause  an  infraction  of  all  the 
other  sections.  The  sale  is  quite  unruly  enough  where  it  is  forbidden 
by  law ; where  it  is  legalized,  it  breaks  all  bounds,  and  is  as  uncon- 
trollable as  the  w’inds.  If  temperance  men  could  be  induced  to  assist 
in  the  execution  of  a license  law,  its  restrictive  clauses  might  have 
some  little  effect ; but  that  is  out  of  the  question.  A temperance  man 
sees  little  use  in  prosecuting  one  man  for  doing  w'hat  another  in  the 
same  place  has  a lawful  right  to  do.  Why  should  he  be  a prosecutor 
in  such  a case  ? What  can  he  gain  by  it,  except  ill-will  ? Will  the 
friends  of  a license  law  back  him  in  its  enforcement  ? Not  they. 
Their  sympathies  are  generally  with  the  culprit.  If  he  convicts  a 
landlord  of  selling  to  a minor,  that  will  not  stop  him  and  others  from 
selling  to  the  same  boy  the  day  he  is  of  age.  If  he  convicts  him  of 
selling  to  drunkards,  that  will  not  stop  him  and  others  from  selling 
to  sober  men,  which  is  a greater  crime,  as  it  is  worse  to  raise  a new 
crop  of  drunkards  than  to  peddle  out  drams  to  old  ones.  If  he  stops 
the  traffic  in  his  neighborhood  on  Sunday,  it  is  only  to  see  it  begin 
agi.in  more  briskly  on  Monday  moruing.  He  is  painfully  conscious 
that  the  most  rigid  execution  of  a license  law,  so  far  from  accomplish- 
ing his  desire,  would  only  make  rum-selling  and  rum-drinking  more 
decent  iu  the  estimation  of  the  shallow-pated,  and  more  popular  with 
atoderate  tipplers.  Why  should  a temperance  man  be  a volunteer  in 
a Work  so  odious  and  bootless  ? 

Wo  all  know  how  little  the  liquor  party  are  to  be  relied  on  to  enforoi 
tlte  restrictive  provisions  of  a license  law,  either  against  the  vendei 
who  oversteps  its  bounds,  or  against  him  who  sells  without  a license. 
As  a genera]  rule,  the  mass  of  them  care  not  a straw  how  much  theit 
own  law  is  violated,  so  long  as  liauor  is  plenty  and  cheap.  Why 


14 


THE  FKHIT8  OF  THE  LIQUOR  TRAFFIC, 


should  they,  when  that  is  their  main  object?  How  rigidly  moderat* 
drinkers  apply  its  penalties  to  inebriates  who  indulg*  in  a “ bom”  or 
two  more  than  themselves,  we  all  know  from  past  experience.  A stag- 
gering sot  arrested  by  a fuddled  constable  and  taken  before  a guzzling 
magistrate  for  examination  is  a sight  that  does  not  often  occur,  though 
well  cakulated  to  excite  the  most  varied  and  conflicting  emotions.  Ai 
well  mif  lit  we  expect  burglars  and  thieves  to  be  active  in  bringing  fel 
ons  to  j.istice.  Every  law  on  the  statute-book  should  be  of  such  e 
character,  that  good  men  will  not  scruple  to  enforce  it.  A.  license  law 
will  always  be  left  to  the  care  of  its  friends.  The  right  to  sell  that 
which  is  a banc  to  virtue,  is  the  only  feature  in  it  that  is  generally  recog- 
nized, and  that  provokes  a disregard  of  every  other.  The  leg.d  traffic 
may.  therefore,  be  justly  regarded  as  the  parent  of  the  illegal  traffic  in  all 
its  pnases,  whether  under  a license  law  or  a prohibitory  law.  The  bitter 
fruits  of  license  continue  to  manifest  themselves  long  after  a prohib- 
itory law  is  enacted,  as  the  waves  of  the  ocean  continue  to  fret  and  rage 
after  a storm. 

Having  shown  that  a prohibitory  statute  is  the  only  one  under  which 
the  traffic  dan  be  even  partially  controlled,  I proceed  to  show  that 
It  is  an  agency  by  which  it  may  be  wholly  suppressed.  If  it  is  not 
utterly  annihilated  in  every  State  where  such  a law  exists,  the  fault  is 
not  in  the  law,  certainl}’’,  but  in  its  administration.  A law  does  not 
execute  itself.  It  is  not  of  itself  an  actor,  but  s simply  a rule  of  action. 
If  the  rule  be  a good  one,  it  is  always  read  ’ to  be  used  effectually 
when  needed.  Impartial  prohibition  is  so  macifestl}'  right  and  fair  lO 
all  parties,  as  to  commend  itself  to  the  favor  of  ai’  good  citizens.  “ The 
reason  of  the  law  is  the  life  of  the  law.”  A prohi'>itory  law  is  the  per- 
fection of  human  reason,  and  the  only  one  that  is  ever  applied  to  the 
suppression  of  such  crimes  as  are  not  to  be  tolerated 

If  such  a law  can  not  be  rigidly  executed,  the  fault  must  be  in  its 
executors  or  in  the  people.  It  can  not  be  in  the  latter,  for  it  has  been 
nowhere  adopted  without  the  sanction  of  the  peoule  by  o 'erwhelming 
majorities.  Its  opponents  are  a minority  wherever  it  exists  Thej'  do 
not  openly  rebel  against  it  by  force.  They  simplv  evade  it  wnere  they 
can.  That  was  to  be  expected,  as  they  have  been  debased  under  the 
pernicious  effect  of  a license  law.  .iArtificial  appetites  have  been  engen- 
dered. These  must  have  time  to  die  out,  or  those  who  are  sc  unfortu- 
nate as  to  be  controlled  by  them  must  have  lime  to  die  off.  No  such 
appetite  exists  except  where  it  has  been  formed  by  a bad  habit  A 
person  that  never  tastes  alcohol  never  feels  a particle  of  desire  for  it 
and  ‘here  would  not  be  the  least  opposition  to  tne  eniorcement  ol  a 
prohib’tory  law  if  there  were  no  unnatural  appetites.  Is  it  reasonable 
that  the  vices  of  the  minority,  which  were  developed  and  fostered  by 
the  old  law,  should  be  permitted  to  defeat  the  new  one  ? 

A righteous  law  is  a beneficent  educator  of  the  people ; under  a 
license  law,  drinking  is  legal  and  popular ; under  a prohibitory  law,  it 
is  illegal  and  unpopular.  Under  a license  law.  the  world  would  Iona 


AND  THE  RESULTS  OF  PKOHIBITION. 


15 


hnce  hive  become  worse  than  Sodom,  had  it  not  been  for  the  countei' 
icting,  yet  almost  thankless  efforts  of  the  oft-derided  friends  of  temper 
auce.  They  alone,  under  God,  have  kept  it  worth  saving,  and  a fit  abode 
for  Christians.  Their  main  reliance  now  is  a prohibitory  law,  and 
they  will  not  abandon  it  because  it  is  opposed  by  such  as  liave  been 
demoralized  by  license.  Those  who  di'ink  to  appease  the  cravings  of 
a morbid  appetite,  will  continue  to  drink  under  any  law  that  can  b« 
framed  as  long  as  they  can  obtain  liquor.  Those  who  drink  occasii.  u- 
aiiy  foi  mere  fashion’s  sake,  will  be  less  inclined  to  persist  in  it  under 
tlie  ban  of  law ; those  who  have  not  commenced  the  practice  will  be 
Bti.l  less  likely  to  begin  it;  and  the  longer  such  a law  exists  the  more 
easy  it  will  be  to  execute  it  thoroughly.  Tliis  is  not  mere  theory,  how- 
ever rational,  but  the  experience  of  every  State  where  it  has  been  tried. 
It  is  what  I myself  witnessed  during  a four  years’  residence  in  Iowa. 
Were  it  not  for  extending  this  essay  beyond  the  required  length,  I 
might  give  a history  of  successful  prohibition  in  Mohammedan  coun- 
tries, New  Zealand,  etc. ; but  I will  begin  with  that  State  which  has 
the  credit  of  being  the  first  in  our  Union  to  adopt  it. 

RESULTS  IN  MAINE. 

One  of  the  most  important  and  interesting  records  that  will  engage 
the  pen  of  the  future  historian,  will  be  the  struggle  in  the  different 
States  for  a prohibitory  law.  That  noble  veteran,  the  Rev.  .John 
Marsh,  has  commenced  the  work.  When  every  State  in  our  grand 
Republic  shall  be  in  the  full  enjoyment  of  its  countless  blessings,  the 
history  should  be  completed.  I shall  confine  myself  now  to  results. 

After  various  unsuccessful  attempts,  during  a period  of  ten  years,  the 
real  Maine  Law  was  adopted  May,  1851,  and  went  almost  immedi- 
ately into  effect.  The  first  seizure  of  liquor  was  made  at  Bangor,  on 
the  4th  of  July  following.  Ten  casks  of  it  were  emptied  on  the  ground 
in  the  presence  of  glad  people.  Soon  after  the  majmr  of  Portland  did 
the  same  with  $2,000  worth  of  liquor.  On  both  occasions  the  people, 
male  and  female,  witnessed  the  righteous  act  in  respectful  silence. 
Other  like  events  followed  without  provoking  serious  opposition. 
Drunkenness  and  disorder  quickly  vanished.  Poor-houses  became 
empty;  houses  of  correction  and  jails  lost  their  inmates  to  such  a 
(Icgice  that  some  of  them  were  entirely  closed,  and  peace  and  plenty 
reign  sd ; industry,  frugality,  and  thrift  vrere  everj'where  disclosed.  5'r. 
Neal  Dow,  mayor  of  Portland,  makes  a statement,  Aug.  27th,  1853, 
which  aJ  who  rejoice  over  the  suppression  of  the  evil  will  be  glsd  ic 
vsacl  : 

“ The  fatts  in  relation  to  the  working  of  the  law  have  been  published 
often  for  tl-.e  last  two  years,  and  never  has  any  attempt  been  made  by 
a responsible  person  to  disprove  them.  At  the  time  of  the  enactment 
of  the  law,  rum-selling  was  carried  on  openly  in  all  parts  of  the  State, 
in  Portland  there  were  between  three  and  four  hundred  rum-sbop«k 
and  immediately  after  the  enactment  of  the  law  not  one. 

“ The  wholesale  trade  in  liquors  was  at  once  annihilated. 


16  THE  FETTITS  OF  THE  LIQHOK  TEATTIC, 

“ It  was  the  tmanimous  declaration  of  all  the  watchmen  and  police, 
tiiat  the  city  was  like  an  entirely  new  place.  Many  shops,  whicli  befor« 
were  rum-shops,  were  converted  into  other  branches  of  trade ; and 
almost  every  indication  of  intemperance  was  banished.  A.t  the  end  of 
tlie  municipal  year  18C1-2,  an  official  report  to  tlic  city  council  on  tha 
operation  of  the  law’  in  Portland  w’as  ordered  to  be  printed  and  ffis- 
tiibuted  through  the  city;  its  statements  were  not  at  the  time,  nor  have 
tliey  since  been,  denied.  The  law  had  w’orked  such  wondere  in  tea 
Bionths  as  to  cause  a decrease  of  committals  to  the  Alms-house,  100; 
to  House  of  CoiTection  for  Intemperance,  36,  making  142.  At  the  same 
time  the  number  of  inmates  in  the  Alms-house  w’as  reduced  22,  while 
1J*e  number  of  out-door  families  requiring  aid  was  4)  less  than  the  ten 
tuoutlis  previous.  At  the  term  of  the  District  Court  in  March,  1831, 
there  were  seventeen  indictments ; at  the  term  for  1852  there  was  but 
one,  and  that  the  result  of  a mistake.”  That  was  just  what  its  most 
ardent  friends  predicted,  and  their  Heaven-inspired  hopes  were  now 
realized. 

Dr.  Frederick  Richard  Lees,  of  England,  whose  profound  and  com 
prehensive  works  on  the  temperance  question  are  unrivaled  in  our 
language,  visited  Maine  about  that  time  for  the  purpose  of  witnessing 
the  effect  of  the  law.  He  tells  us  that  he  sought  for  strong  drink  at 
several  of  the  hotels  in  Portland,  but  could  get  none.  Fearing  that 
there  might  be  places  in  the  city  where  it  was  sold  secretly,  he  met  a 
mechanic  on  the  street  who  he  informed  that  he  was  a foreigner,  and 
asked  if  he  did  not  know  where  he  could  get  a drink  ? The  answer 
was,  “ Ho ; and  if  I did,  I would  not  tell  jmu.”  Such  was  the  com- 
mendable spirit  of  the  working-classes. 

The  mayor  of  Bangor,  in  his  message  to  the  council,  April  22d, 
1852,  says;  “ On  the  1st  of  July,  when  I gave  notice  that  I should 
enforce  the  law,  108  persons  w’ere  selling  liquors  here ; 20  of  them 
have  left  the  city.  Of  the  remaining  88,  not  one  sells  openly.  The 
number  of  inmates  in  our  Alms-house  and  House  of  Correction  have 
been  reduced  3,104;  the  number  of  prosecutions  has  been  reduced 
43.”  Such  facts  will  bear  w’itness  through  all  time  to  the  efficacy  of 
prohibition. 

The  marshal  of  Augusta  reports,  for  1852,  as  follows : “ Augusta 
had  4 wholesale  liquor  stores  and  25  retail  shops.  Three  of  the  wliole- 
sale  dealers  sent  off  their  liquor  to  Hew  York ; the  remaining  lina 
persisted  in  selling,  until  about  $1,000  worth  was  seized.  Liquor  may 
be  sold  at  the  principal  hotels,  but  stealthily.  One  of  tlie  keepers  hf»e 
bsex.  tw.ee  convicted.  The  police  used  to  be  called  up  100  nights  i.a 
a year.  Since  the  passage  of  the  law  they  have  not  been  summoned 
once.”  Oh,  happy,  thrice  happy  Augusta ! Such  facts  tell  a tale  more 
convincing  than  tongue  or  pen. 

The  report  of  the  marshal  of  Gardiner  is  still  more  flattering: 

March  8th,  1852.  At  the  commencement  of  the  official  term  there 
were  in  the  city  14  places  where  liquor  was  sold,  some  of  them  the 


AND  TITE  EESTTLTS  OF  PROHIBITION. 


17 


resort  of  drunken,  riotous,  and  disorderly  persons.  But  one  person 
nas  been  convicted  of  drunkenness  for  the  last  four  months  ; but  two 
sent  to  the  workliouse  for  the  last  six  months.  The  law  has  been 
rigidly  and  quietly  enforced.”  If  in  a place  of  that  size,  with  14  dena 
fiequentcd  bj’-  “dinnken,  riotous,  and  disorderly  persons,”  the  law 
was  put  quietly  and  rigidly  into  force,  the  same  may  be  done  any- 
where and  everywhere.  Gardiner  has  settled  that  question. 

The  report  from  IVaterville  is  of  the  same  character.  “ Ten  or 
eleven  years  ago  the  cost  of  pauperism  rose  in  a manner  unaccount- 
able, bitt  for  excessive  drinking,  from  $T00  to  $1,800  a year.  This 
year,  with  twice  the  population,  the  cost  of  the  poor  will  not  exceed 
$1,000.  The  amount  of  crime  is  greatly  lessened.  Those  who  still 
deseiwc  the  name  of  dinnkards  are  mostly  Irishmen  and  Canadians.” 
Prohibition  is  the  thing  to  cure  the  Irish  and  make  them  the  best 
people  in  the  world  Ireland  has  suffered  more  from  whisky  than 
from  British  tyranny.  The  banishment  of  alcohol  would  secure  their 
freedom.  So  long  as  the}'  indulge  in  that  they  must  remain  k-  Bond- 
age, m spite  of  Feuianism. 

The  Calais  council  report : “ Where  enforced,  the  results  ure  good ; 
where  not  enforced,  the  old  anti-Maine  law  justices  are  in  fault. 
Many  of  those  who  sold  liquor  have  given  their  attention  to  other  busi- 
ness, and  are  now  better  off  than  when  selling  liquor.”  No  doubt  of  that, 
as  the  rum-traffic  desti'oys  about  three  fourths  of  those  engaged  in  it. 

Professor  Pond,  of  Bangor,  writes : “ I have  not  seen  a drunken 
man  in  our  streets  for  the  last  six  months.  The  House  of  Correction 
has  been  at  times  almost  empty ; I know  not  but  it  is  so  now.  The 
expense  of  paupers  is  greatly  diminished.” 

The  Hon.  Sidney  Perham,  Speaker  of  the  House  of  Representatives, 
says : “ My  knowledge  of  the  workings  of  the  law  extends  over  a large 
section  of  the  State.  I can  assure  you  it  works  well.”  What  better 
evidence  could  we  have  of  its  efficacy?  Such  were  the  results  of  the 
law  when  it  first  went  into  operation,  and  at  a time  of  course  when 
its  rigid  enforcement  must  have  been  the  most  difficult.  Testimonials 
to  any  extent,  of  a similar  character,  might  be  given,  reaching  through 
E period  of  sixteen  years. 

How  stands  the  case  now  ? At  the  National  Convention  held  at 
Saratoga  Springs,  August,  18G5,  that  noble  patriot  and  hero  Gen.  Neal 
Dow  said : “ The  traffic,  in  intoxicating  liquor  is  considered  as  di.s- 
tepu.able  in  Maine  as  keeping  a gambling-house.  He  admitted  that 
the  law  had  not  been  in  such  active  operation  during  the  war,  as  the 
energies  of  the  people  were  directed  to  the  salvation  of  the  country  • 
hu':  hereafter  they  will  go  to  work  with  increased  zeal.  In  large  dis- 
tricts of  Maine  the  traffic  is  entirely  unknown.” 

About  the  same  time,  there  appeared  before  the  public  a witness 
whose  word  can  not  be  doubted  by  the  most  zealous  of  the  license 
party,  and  as  it  is  a clincher,  it  is  the  last  I shaL  offer,  so  far  as  relate# 
to  Maine.  I allude  to  the  valuable  testimony  of  the  Hon.  Woodbiuy 


18  THE  FRUITS  'OF  THE  LIQUOR  TRAFFIC, 

Davis,  of  the  Supreme  Court  of  that  State.  It  appears  from  the  stato 
«ient  of  Judge  Davis,  that  the  law,  as  it  now  stands,  is  not  exactly 
what  its  friends  would  make  it,  but  is  crippled  for  want  of  adequaU 
penalties,  such  as  imprisonment  for  its  violation.  This  is  the  work 
of  its  enemies,  and  designed  to  prevent  its  execution.  Notwithstand- 
big  this  defect,  it  is  enforced,  and  that  more  rigidly  than  any  license 
kw  ever  has  been  either  in  Maine  or  anywhere  else.  Its  enemies  are 
aol  temperance  men,  who  are  disappointed  in  its  operations,  but  the 
Aiends  of  the  liquor  traffic.  Their  ciy  against  it,  because  it  is  not  en- 
forced, is  altogether  hypocritical.  If  they  did  not  fee!  Its  fwce,  they 
would  not  cry  at  all-  and  if  it  were  more  rigidly  enforced,  their  cry 
would  be  all  the  louder.  One  would  naturally  expect  to  hear  those 
Who  raise  this  cry  equally  loud  in  denouncing  the  laws  against  gam- 
bling, licentiousness  forgery,  and  theft,  as  failures,  because  of  their 
constant  violation.  In  regard  to  the  daily  and  hourly  iufiaction  of 
those  laws  we  hear  scarcely  a whimper  from  them.  “ Thej-  roar  aa 
gently  as  sucking  doves.”  They  should,  to  be  consistent,  demand  the 
repeal  of  every  law  on  the  statute-book  which  is  not  rigidly  executed ; 
and  such  crimes  as  have  not  been  entirely  prevented  bj'  law  should 
be  regulated  by  some  sagacious  sj^stem  of  license. 

Judge  Davis  shows  that  the  complaint  that  a prohibitory'  law  can 
not  be  enforced  is  both  false  and  liypocritical ; for  it  is  enforced,  and 
that  more  generally  than  its  enemies  desire.  “No  observing  man” 
(says  he),  “ who  has  lived  in  this  State  for  twenty  years,  and  has  had 
an  opportunity  to  know  the  facts,  can  doubt  that  the  Maine  Law  has 
produced  a hundred  times  more  visible  improvement  in  the  character, 
condition,  and  prosperity  of  our  people  than  any  other  law  that  was 
ever  enacted.”  Mark  that — “ than  any  other  law  that  was  ever 
enacted.”  This  law,  so  ably  advocated  in  the  British  Parliament,  in 
1743,  by  Lords  Harvey,  Talbot,  Stanhope,  Aylesford,  Beaufort,  Lons- 
dale, Chesterfield,  Sandwich,  Bristol,  Halifax,  Haversham,  Aylesbury, 
Gower,  and  Bedford ; the  Bishops  of  Canterburj',  Asaph,  London, 
Norwich,  Gloucester,  Oxford,  Bristol,  and  Salisbury,  is  now,  and  has 
been  for  sixteen  years,  the  peculiar  and  eternal  glory  of  the  State  of 
Maine,  our  serene  and  sober  Eastern  sister,  whose  benignant  featiu-es 
are  first  gilded  by  the  beams  of  the  morning,  and  who  has  been  *lie 
first  to  enjoy  moral  daylight.  She  first  adopted  it,  and  still  clings  to  it 
aa  the  ark  of  her  safety.  The  noblest  of  her  sons  testify  tli.at  it  has 
been  fraught  with  more  home  comfort  and  substantial  prosperity 
than  any  ukase,  edict,  ordination,  proclamation,  or  legislative  act  that 
ean  be  pointed  to  in  the  whole  histoi-}'  of  man.  IIoaTcn  bless  the  1-m.i 
of  rock  and  pine  ; may  her  prohibition  of  the  Jenor  plague  bei  i.une 
universal  and  remain  forever  ! Sixteen  years  .s  something  in  the  life 
of  a State.  That  much  at  least  is  secure.  Its  benefits  and  blessings 
ere  on  record,  and  constitute  the  brightest  page  in  the  history  of  any 
commonwealth.  It  is  some  consolation  to  know  that  that  cheering 
and  inspiring  record  can  not  be  blotted  out 


AlTD  THE  EESTJLT8  OF  PEOmBmOST. 


19 


j Judge  Davis  is  simply  testifying  to  what  he  has  seen  and  knowa 
I ‘ Having  served”  (says  he)  “ for  neai'ly  ten  years  as  one  of  the  justices 
[ of  our  Supreme  Court,  I have  tried  many  cases  against  common  sellers 
! Ln  different  counties,  from  one  extreme  of  the  State  to  the  other.  And 
aotwitlistanding  the  unthithfulness  or  timidity  of  temperance  men,  the 
difficulties  in  enforcing  the  law,  the  inadequacy  of  its  peniltics,  and 
I yie  effect  o:'  the  war  in  retarding  its  execution,  I am  coETtrxed  by 
I wh-it  I have  seen  that  it  has  accomplished  an  incalculable  amount  of 
I good.  01  our  four  hundred  towns  and  cities — making  the  cstin.atfl 
below  w lmt  I relieve  the  facts  would  justify — I am  satisfied  that  in 
m.>re  than  one  hundred  the  law  prevents  any  sale  of  liquors  whatevf  r 
as  a beverage.  In  at  least  two  hundred  of  them  it  is  sold  only  on  the 
sly,  just  as  in  the  same  towns  there  are  persons  guilty  of  lewdness  and 
other  crimes.  Such  I believe  to  be  a fair  statement  of  existing  fa( 
and  circumstances  connected  with  the  Maine  Law  in  this  State.  They 
prove  the  law,  even  with  its  inadequate  penalties,  to  be  far  superior 
to  any  license  law ; and  that  there  is  no  such  fiiilure  to  enforce  it  aa 
will  justify  either  the  friends  or  the  enemies  of  the  temperance  reform 
in  opposing  it.”  From  this  it  appears  that  the  law  has  a far  more 
restrictive  influence,  even  where  it  is  most  resisted,  than  any  license 
law  ever  enacted.  Who  could  expect,  for  the  time  it  has  been  in 
djteration  and  the  chance  it  has  had,  an  exposition  more  favorable,  or 
testimony  more  reliable,  than  we  have  in  this  truthful  letter  of  Judge 
Davis,  and  for  which  he  deserves  the  gratitude  of  every  friend  of 
human  welfare.  It  is  a thunderbolt  from  the  right  quarter,  and  has 
shivered  and  scattered  to  the  winds  the  sophistries  of  all  classes  of 
advocates  of  schemes  for  the  legal  permission  of  sin  and  crime.  The 
Maine  Law  is  not  a failure,  but  it  is  an  abiding  power  in  the  land. 
Glory  to  the  Highest  for  this  glad  evangel,  this  welcome  assurance 
of  the  ultimate  triumph  of  our  Cause  1 There  willoyet  be  peace  on 
earth  and  good-will  toward  men  ! 

PKOniBtTION  IN  OTHER  STATES. 

A prohibitory  law  was  adopted  in  Massachusetts,  May,  1852 ; Ver- 
mont, Dec.,  1852;  Connecticut,  June,  1854;  Michigan,  1854;  New 
York,  April,  1855;  Iowa,  April,  1855;  and  in  New  Hampshire,  Aug., 
1855.  It  has  become  a permanent  institution  in  all  of  the  a.  ve- 
named  States,  except  New  York,  where,  owing  to  some  of  its  i»ecular 
provisions,  it  was  murdert'd  by  an  alcoholic  decision  of  her  Supreme 
Coimt.  A very  few  out  of  many  testimonials  to  its  good  results  is  all  ] 
tavc  room  for. 

MASSACHUSETTS. 

I might  j'ile  up  unquestioned  facts  to  any  amount  showing  the  good 
results  of  ].roliibitiou  in  the  Old  Bay  State,  where  its  effect  has  been 
the  same  as  in  Maine.  Tliat  would  be  superfluous.  A more  imporinnt 
Bubjet  t presents  itself.  What  do  the  people  of  that  historical  comiron- 
wealth  say  of  the  law  now,  after  fifteen  3mars’  e.xperience?  It  is  well 
known  to  all  that  a majority  of  license  men  were  elected  to  her  Legi» 


20 


THE  FETJIT8  OF  THE  UQTrOS  TEAFFIC, 


lature  on  the  5th  of  November  last.  Does  that  prove  that  prohibition  K 
a failure  there  ? No  more  than  their  defeat  at  Bunker  Hill  proved  that 
the  Revolution  was  a failure  ; no  more  than  the  attempt  to  sunder  oin 
Union  proved  the  cause  of  free  government  a failure.  The  infan  oiu 
Southern  Confederacy  promised  success  for  awhile,  and  really  did  ex- 
ist as  a power  longer  than  a license  law  will  ever  again  exist  in  31i5s*- 
chusetts.  Prohibition  has  met  its  first  reverse  in  that  State,  and  Ihvt 
is  a.l.  Every  good  cause  is  liable  to  that.  Thej’  had  enjoyed  tha 
blessing  so  long  that  they  did  not  appreciate  it.  They  did  not  realize 
how  much  better  off  they  were  than  their  fellow-citizens  in  States 
cursed  by  a license  law.  If  they  require  a severe  lesson  to  open  their 
eyes  they  may  get  it  soon  enough.  If  fifteen  years  of  trial  had  shown 
it  to  be  a failure,  there  would  be  no  hope  for  it  among  the  enlightened 
people  of  Massachusetts.  But  it  is  still  cherished  by  all  of  her  wisest 
and  best ; and  if  it  be  an  unqualified  blessing,  if  it  possess  those  in- 
nerent  virtues  its  friends  claim  for  it,  though  baffled  and  prostrate  for 
a season,  “ it  will  rise  f.gain,”  and  irut  forth  increased  strength.  To 
doubt  it  is  to  doubt  the  omnipotence  of  Deity,  and  the  ultimate  triumph 
of  riglit  over  wrong.  The  righteous  have  consolation  in  adversity ; the 
wicked  have  fearful  forebodings  in  the  hour  of  ^ictory,  for  they  know 
their  deeds  wil'  expose  them,  and  that  they  can  not  agree  among 
themselves.  At  this  very  moment  the  guilty  autliors  of  this  malignant 
change  in  Massachusetts  are  plagued  with  chilling  apprehensions  of 
the  future.  The  bitter  fruits  of  their  temporary  triumph  are  already 
disclosing  themselves.  Here  is  a specimen.  The  U.  S.  revenue  tax 
on  sales  of  liquor  was  reduced'in  one  district  in  Boston  by  the  vigilance 
of  the  State  constable,  acting  in  obedience  to  the  prohibitory  statute, 
from  $24,000  a month  down  to  $6,000  a month.  The  recent  victory 
of  the  liquor  party  has  raised  it  already  to  $22,000  for  the  last  month. 

I feel  that  I can  not  conclude  this  part  of  my  subject  better  than  by 
introducing  extracts  from  an  address,  recently  put  forth  b}'  Gilbert 
Haven,  A.  A.  Miner,  E.  P.  Marvin,  and  R.  C.  Pitman,  four  men  of 
as  spotless  honor,  high  social  position,  and  distinguished  ability  as  can 
be  found  in  the  State.  Its  vindication  of  the  law  is  so  complete,  its 
explanation  of  the  brief  repulse  of  its  friends  so  clear,  and  the  reasons 
for  confidence  in  the  speedy  recovery  of  lost  ground  are  sc  rogent,  that  it 
will  satisfy  all  fair-minded  men  that  prohibition  has  not  been,  aud  can 
not  be,  a failure  in  Massachusetts.  What  is  right  never  fails,  though 
the  ignorant  and  sordid  may  reject  it  for  a time.  Wrong  always  haa 
failed,  and  in  spite  of  the  “ archangel  ruined,”  it  alwaj’s  will.  But  if 
the  address,  every  word  of  which  should  be  copied  had  I space  for  it 

“ The  Prohibitor}’  Law  went  into  effect  in  all  the  towns  of  the  Cem 
inonwealth.  It  was  executed  in  everj’  city  except  Charlestown  and 
Boston.  It  received  the  approval  of  ever}"  legislature.  It  was  earned 
up  to  our  Supreme  Court,  and  received  the  indorsement  of  Chief  Jus- 
tice Shaw  and  his  associates.  It  was  attacked  in  Congress  and  in  th« 
Bupreme  Court  of  the  United  States,  and  both  the  national  l^islaturt 


Airo  THE  RESTTLTS  OF  PKOmBITIOK. 


21 


md  national  court  recognized  its  legality.  While  thus  assailoi  by  in* 
terested  enemies,  it  was  carrying  blessings  through  all  the  Common* 
wealth.  Three  fourths  of  our  towns,  including  nearly  every  small  vil- 
lage and  most  of  our  large  towns,  were  without  any  public  bars.  Almost 
6 generation  has  grotvn  up  in  these  places  without  beholding  the  opey 
sale  of  intoxicating  spirits. 

“ As  a consequence  of  this  law,  pauperism  and  crime  had  greatly  Je- 
51'easol  in  all  localities  where  it  was  observed.  In  not  a few  of  evea 
sur  largest  towns  the  alms-house  had  become  an  obsolete  instituticn. 

“ The  State  constabulary  was  established,  and  has  suppressed  the  sala 
«f  spirits  in  many  of  our  cities,  aud  greatly  reduced  it  in  the  city  of 
Boston.  During  the  last  two  3'ears  it  has  closed  hundreds  of  dram- 
shojts.  It  has  abolished  more  than  twenty-live  hundred  open  bars  in 
tliis  city.  It  has  paid  into  the  treasury  of  the  State  within  the  nine 
months  ending  Oct.  1st,  1867,  in  fines,  $199  421  64;  in  value  of  liquors 
seized  and  sold,  not  less  than  $40,000 — a sum  amounting  to  one  hun- 
dred and  fifty  thousand  dollars  more  than  all  the  expenses  of  the  police. 

“ If  the  present  law  is  repealed  and  license  substituted,  we  may  ex- 
pect to  see  the  statistics  of  intemperance  more  carefully  collected  and 
more  faithfully  disclosed  in  Massachusetts  than  has  ever  been  done  in 
any  community  on  earth.” 

VERMONT. 

In  no  part  ot  the  Union  has  the  law  been  attended  vrith  happier  re- 
sults than  in  the  Green  Mountain  State.  Of  numerous  testimonials  in 
my  possession,  one  is  all  I have  room  for.  Mr.  Underwood,  State 
Attorney,  says : “ The  law  has  put  an  end  to  drunkenness  and  crime 
almost  entirely.”  That  will  do,  as  it  proves  that  “ The  Star  That 
I^ever  Sets”  derives  its  quenchless  luster  from  the  prohibition  of  the 
liquor  traffic.  Brave  old  Vermont,  may  her  waters  be  always  pure, 
and  her  mountains  always  green ! 

CONNECTICUT. 

The  Land  of  Steady  Habits,  where  intelligence  is  so  generally  dit- 
flised,  was  the  very  State  to  embrace  the  righteous  principle  of  pro- 
hibition. It  always  commends  itself  to  the  wise  and  virtuous  as  a 
shield  against  ignorance  and  immorality.  Good  old  Connecticut 
adopted  the  law  in  June,  1854.  The  vote  in  the  House  stood,  148  for, 
to  31  against  it ; in  the  Senate,  13  for,  to  1 against  it.  This  was  a good 
beginning,  and  as  might  have  been  expected,  it  has  been  steadily 
justained  from  that  day  to  this.  Here,  as  elsewluie,  the  change  foi 
which  her  greatest  and  best  had  toiled  so  long  was  so  gratifying  as  to 
ihrow  them  off  their  guai’d  and  make  them  feel  too  secure.  This  re- 
laxation of  vigilance  and  effort,  the  natural  result  of  victory,  prevented 
them  from  following  up  the  routed  and  flying  foe.  They  should  havo 
piessea  on,  and  given  no  quarter,  until  his  last  mercenary  w'as  captured. 
They  have  done  well  in  Connecticut,  and  I feel  confident  they  will 
tsre  1 mg  do  better,  aye,  much  better.  If  there  is  a country  on  the  glob* 
that  should  be  rid  of  that  intolerable  scourge — a liquor  traffic,  it  ia  th« 


22 


THE  FETITS  OF  THE  LIQTJOE  TEAFFTC. 


land  of  Edwards  and  Jewett.  Like  our  friends  in  other  States,  they 
have  their  seasons  of  lethargy — perhaps  of  discourageteent,  but  they 
will  never  tern  back  to  a license  law  That  compound  of  folly  and 
crime,  that  produces  drunkards  faster  than  they  can  be  reclaimed,  wil 
never  again  desecrate  their  soil. 

The  act  went  into  effect  under  the  administration  of  that  wise  and 
pure  statesman  Gov.  Dutton.  Read  what  he  said  of  its  results. 

In  a letter,  dated  New  Haven,  Oct.  20th,  18-54,  he  says:  “The  law 
has  been  thoroughly  executed,  with  much  less  difficulty  and  oppcei- 
tion  than  was  anticipated.  In  no  instance  has  a seizure  produced  any 
general  excitement.  The  longer  the  beneficial  results  of  the  law  art. 
Been  and  felt,  the  more  firmly^  it  becomes  established.” 

The  Rev.  Leonard  Bacon,  D.D.,  of  New  Haven,  says ; “ The  opera- 
tion of  the  law  for  one  year  is  a matter  of  observation  to  the  inhabitants. 
Its  effect  in  promoting  peace,  order,  quiet,  and  general  prosperity,  no 
man  can  deny.  Never,  for  twenty  years,  has  our  city  been  so  quiet 
and  peaceful  as  under  its  action.  It  is  no  longer  simply  a question  of 
temperance,  but  a governmental  question  —one  of  legislative  foresight 
and  morality.” 

Rev.  Dr.  Kennady  says : “ The  law  has  produced  the  happiest  re- 
sult— a great  improvement  in  Sabbath-school  attendance.” 

At  the  National  Convention  at  Saratoga,  1865,  Gov.  Dutton  said : “In 
our  country  towns,  although  the  law  is  not  commonl}'  resorted  to,  yet 
it  is  held  as  a rod  over  the  heads  of  those  who  would  otherwise  causa 
intemperance  to  spread  into  those  towns.  The  law  is  not  a failure.” 

NEW  H.VMPSHIRE. 

The  only  witness  of  its  benign  power  which  I have  room  for  is  th# 
Governor  himself  Gov.  Metcalf,  in  his  annual  message  to  the  Legis- 
lature, 1856,  said : “ The  act  is  having  a salutary  effect.  It  is  more 
fully  regarded  and  practically  sustained  than  any  license  law  we  ever 
had  in  the  State.  In  many  towns  the  sale  of  intoxicating  liquors  is 
wholly  abandoned,  and  in  others  it  is  sold  only  as  other  penal  offenses 
are  committed — in  secret.”  Could  anything  be  more  authoritative  or 
more  conclusive?  Such  were  the  first  results  of  the  law. 

In  what  estimation  is  it  held  now  ? The  best  answer  that  can  b« 
given  to  that  question  is  to  be  found  in  an  able  essay  read  at  a State 
Convention  held  at  Concord,  Dec.  12th,  1866,  by  that  ornament  of  the 
judiciary.  Judge  Upton.  The  Convention  was  composed  of  the  mrst 
eminent  men  from  all  parts  of  the  State,  and  they  applauded  and  in 
horsed  the  essay.  In  the  opinion  of  Judge  Upton,  the  law  is  om  of 
4he  most  perfect  ever  framed.  It  had  been  matured  by  the  ablest 
jurists  in  New  Hampshire,  and  “ not  a man,”  said  he,  “ known  in  tlie 
pofitical  history  of  the  State  ever  recorded  his  name  against  it.”  He 
regal  ded  it  as  vciy  easy  of  execution,  and  very  effective.  In  this 
opinion  he  was  sustained  bi^  the  written  statements  of  every  prosecut- 
ing attorney  in  the  State.  His  essay  concludes  with  these  words  : “It 
has  stood  the  test  of  judicial  investigation,  and  has  proved  its  powen 


AND  THE  RESULTS  OF  PROHIBITION.  23 

Its  effectiveness  will  disarm  its  opponents  and  perpetuate  its  existence." 
Who  could  wish  for  better  testimony  ? 

NEW  YORK. 

The  effect  of  the  law  in  New  York  during  the  six  months  it  lasted 
was  quite  as  beneficent  as  in  any  other  State,  but  the  records  of  the 
happy  change  it  wrought  are  too  numerous  to  copy.  Take  the  follow- 
tug  as  a specimen : 

“ Committals  for  offenses  (without  counting  violations  of  the  anti- 
tqucr  law)  in  the  counties  of  Cayuga,  Onondaga,  Seneca  and  Ontario 
were  reduced  153  in  six  months.  The  reduction  of  committals  in  five 
cities,  Albany,  Utica,  Syracuse,  Auburn,  and  Rochester,  for  the  same 
time,  was  1,910;”  making  in  all  3,063  less  number  of  committals  for 
crime  in  four  counties  and  five  cities  during  the  six  months  of  its 
blessed  rule.  Did  any  other  statute  in  any  part  of  the  world  ever  do 
that  much  good  in  so  short  a time  ? That  was  the  happiest  six  months 
ever  enjoyed  by  the  good  people  of  the  Empire  State.  Such  are  some 
of  the  salutary  results  of  a law  that  has  been  denounced  as  “ a failure.” 
There  does  seem  to  be  a failure  somewhere,  but  not  in  a prohibitory 
law,  as  the  above  fa^ts  conclusively  demonstrate ; and  if  not  in  that,  it 
must  be  that  its  enemies  fail  to  speak  the  truth. 

What  is  the  present  condition  of  New  York  under  a license  lawf 
We  have  the  testimony  of  her  best  citizens,  that  drunkenness  and  crime 
are  on  the  increase  all  over  the  State.  Here  is  a picture  just  drawn, 
copied  from  the  New  York  Times,  a strenuous  advocate  for  license. 

“ Last  Saturday  night,  in  a walk  from  Nassau  Street  to  South  Ferry, 
WB  had  ample  food  for  comment  upon  the  Fourth  Commandment. 
Broadway  was  a perfect  hell  of  drunkenness— a howling,  staggering, 
r^pdemonium  of  brutalized  men.’  The  sidewalks  were  traversed  by 
men  in  every  stage  of  intoxication,  reeling  to  and  fro  like  ships  in  a 
»!orm.  The  air  was  laden  with  snatches  of  drunken  songs,  fragments 
of  filthy  language,  or  incoherent  shouts  from  those  who  were  too  di'unk 
to  articulate.  Drunkenness  in  everj'^  dark  lane  and  alley,  only  discov- 
ered by  its  disgusting  ravings.  Drunkenness  in  the  wide  lamp-lit 
streets,  staggert?rg  along  with  swimming  heads,  paralyzed  Ihnbs,  and 
countenances  of  imbecile  sensuality.  Drunkenness  in  the  kennel, 
Btentoriousl}'  respiring  its  fetid  breath.  Drunkenness  clinging  to  the 
lamp-posts.  Drunkenness  coiled  upon  the  door-steps,  waiting  to  be 
robbed  or  murdered.  Drunkenness  screaming  on  the  tops  of  solitary 
omnibuses,  or  hanging  half  out  of  the  windows  of  belated  hackney  caba, 
and  disturbing  the  night  with  incoherent  melodies.” 

Such  is  the  frightful  condition  of  the  greatest  city  in  America  under 
that  paragon  of  legislative  wisdom  the  Metropolitan  Excise  Law.  A 
friend  at  my  elbow  assures  me  that  the  picture  wou'd  apply  equally 
well  to  Pliiladelphia  on  Christmas  night,  1867.  Such  is  New  York, 
Philadelphia,  and  eveiy  other  large  city,  under  a license  law.  Bear 
in  mind,  that  those  who  prate  of  the  failure  of  prohibition  are  to  a mao 
th«  advocates  of  license — of  that  license  law  which  has  failed  in  ©very 


24 


THE  frthts  of  the  liqtjor  teafftc. 


way,  except  in  tlic  production  of  such  scenes  as  aboxe  described 
9ne  of  its  friends ! In  turning  our  otherwise  fair  heritage  into  a perfe<^ 
hell  of  turmoil,  violence,  and  crime,  its  srccess  has  been  unrivaled. 
As  a moral  and  physical  desolator,  it  has  but  one  equal  in  the  unit  erse, 
and  that  is  its  father,  the  devil. 

Want  of  space  compels  me  ver}-  reluctantly  to  omit  all  reference  to 
Uje  operations  of  the  law  in  other  States  and  localities,  where  it  ha* 
beat  equally  efficient  in  banishing  poverty  and  disorder  of  all  kinds. 
Ju  d:fed  by  its  results,  there  is  no  exaggeration  in  saying  it  is  the  best 
law  ever  enacted  since  the  promulgation  of  the  Decalogue,  and  ita 
universal  establish’ment  will  continue  to  claim  the  earnest  prayers,  im- 
flagging  labors,  and  cheerful  sacrifices  of  every  enlightened  friend  of 
humanity,  until  the  drink  fashion,  that  worst  relic  of  ancient  ignorance 
and  barbarism,  is  banished  fi'om  the  world. 

CONCLUSION. 

The  length  of  my  essay  warns  me  to  close.  I do  not  expect  to  make 
men  pious  or  virtuous  by  force  of  law,  but  I do  rely  upon  law  to  make 
them  peaceable  and  civil  to  one  another,  and  assist,  in  connection  with 
moral  means,  in  the  removal  from  their  midst  of  that  which  has  ever 
been  a pestilent  and  venomous  disturber.  I am  aware  that  there  are 
some  professed  temperance  men  who  have  been  led  to  think  that  a 
prohibitory  law  does  no  good  where  it  fails  to  eradicate  at  once  and 
forever  the  liquor  traffic,  whether  executed  or  not.  That  certainly  is  a 
very  preposterous  idea.  As  well  might  a physician  be  reproached  for 
having  failed  to  effect  a cure  in  a case  where,  through  the  negligence 
or  treachery  of  the  nurse,  the  reined}^  he  prescribed  was  not  half  ad- 
ministered. The  law,  like  ever}'  other,  does  good  just  so  fi»r  as  it  is 
executed,  and  may  be  used  to  stop  the  evil  entirely,  and  is  confessedly 
the  only  law  that  can  stop  it.  It  being 'the  only  tiling  that  has  ever 
made  any  impression  on  the  nuisance  it  is  designed  to  extenninate,  the 
choice  is  not  between  it  and  a license  law,  but  between  it  and  none  al 
all.  Does  the  law  of  God  which  says  “ Thou  shall  not  kill”  do  no 
good,  because  murder  is  not  entirely  prevented  ? Opposition  tliere  is, 
and  always  will  be,  to  any  law,  otherwise  there  would  be  no  need  i«f 
law.  Surely  a law  that  can  be  effectually  executed  when  needc>d,  and 
that  never  fails  when  executed,  is  as  good  as  can  rationally  be  ci  sirei 
The  human  intellect  may  be  challenged  to  conceive  of  a better.  untiJ 
me  is  ir  vented  that  will  go  alone — that  will  execute  itself — that  ■will 
its  ov  n volition  seize  every  liquor-seller  and  b.ing  him  to  jusli-t«, 
nr,  what  would  be  better  still,  fasten  upon  the  offender  wlien  about  V] 
.wmmlt  the  act,  and  inflict  the  precise  punishment  mcritei.’.  Such  3 
Saw  shou'd  be  omnipotent  and  omnipresent!  Until  we  arc  blcs.sed 
•sdtli  one  of  that  character,  -we  had  better  be  content  with  tlie  next 
t)>3sl  thing,  which  is  the  Maine  Law,  aud  blame  ourselves  if  it  is  net 
ildroughly  enforced.  Tliere  is  no  escaping  the  conclusion — if  that 
cun  not  be  enforced,  no  other  can.  It  is  not  without  reason,  therefore, 
tlist  all  thoughtful,  earnest,  and  well-informed  temperance  men  are  foi 
t-  prohibitoiy  lau — first,  last,  and  all  the  time,  and  opposed,  delermia 
Silly,  ami  I might  add,  everlastingly  opposed,  to  all  4 thera. 


Wo.  11, 


MAINE  LAW  VINDICATED, 

BT  HON.  WOODBURY  DATIS, 

lUDGS  OB'  THE  8UPEEME  COURT  OF  MAINE. 


P'  has  seemed  to  me,  from  the  controversy  bet^reenDr.  Baconand  otteis, 
that  there  is  no  little  misapprehension,  both  of  principle  and  facts,  k> 
regard  to  what  is  known  as  the  Maine  Law.  I do  not  wish  to  interfere 
in  the  discussion,  but  I propose  to  make  a few  suggestions,  to  which  my 
opportunities  of  observation  may  possibly  give  some  value.  Without 
claiming  to  be  heard  merely  as  an  advocate  of  the  law,  I would  say  some 
things  as  a witness  for  it. 

WHAT  18  THE  QUESTION  f 

It  is  important  to  settle  this  first.  The  rule  of  law,  that  the  issue  must 
be  made  up  before  the  parties  proceed  to  the  trial,  is  simply  the  dictate 
of  common  sense.  Until  this  is  done,  it  can  not  be  known  to  what  point 
the  advocate  should  speak,  or  the  witness  testify.  If  the  question  is, 
whether  entire  abstinence  from  the  use  of  intoxicating  liquors,  as  a bev- 
erage, is  a duty,  the  facts  as  well  as  the  arguments  necessary  and  perti 
Bent  will  be  entirely  different  from  those  that  would  be  required  in 
considering  the  question,  admitting  the  duty,  whethsr  the  Maine  Law  is 
better  than  any  other.  The  latter  question  can  not  be  considered  at  all 
until  the  former  is  settled ; for  the  law  assumes  that  it  is  settled,  and  is 
based  upon  the  admitted  duty.  But  Dr.  Bacon  makes  no  such  admission, 
and  much  that  he  has  said  seems  to  imply  a denial  of  any  such  duty.  It 
is  due  to  himself  as  well  as  to  the  cause  of  Temperance,  which  he  professej 
to  love,  that  he  should  state  whether  he  admits  the  obligation  of  Total  Ab- 
stinence. If  not,  the  easiest  way  to  dispose  of  the  Maine  Law  is  to  deny 
ttis  fundamental  principle  that  lies  at  the  foundation  of  it.  If  he  demes 
the  duty,  and  is  arguing  that  question,  we  shall  know  how  to  UBderstand 
wnat  he  says.  If  he  admits  the  duty,  and  is  arguing  the  other  qnestioa 
under  that  admission,  then  we  have  something  by  which  to  test  his  ar- 
guments. The  unfairness  of  considering  the  latter  question,  while  evading 
the  former,  must  be  obvious  to  every  one. 

total  abstinence  a duty. 

In  the  suggestions  which  I propose  to  make,  I may  assume  this.  If  vro 
flaay  judge  from  the  Saratoga  National  Convention,  the  sentiment  of  Temper- 
ance men  is  unanimous  in  this  respect.  The  moderate  use  of  intoxicating 


s 


MATITE  LAW  VlIIDIOATEr). 


liqaore  by  all,  in  any  community,  is  an  impossibility.  Some  penoBi, 
If  they  drink  at  all,  will  driak  to  excess.  Every  drunkard  has  been  a 
croderate  drinker  ; and  every  moderate  drinker,  if  not  in  danger  of  be- 
coming a drunkard,  is  encouraging  others  to  drink,  who  cerwinly  will 
become  drunkards.  A good  man  who  drinks  wine  at  a wed. ling,  or  at  a 
social  party,  does  more  to  increase  intemperance  than  the  erampie  of 
many  drunkards  can  do.  If,  therefore,  he  does  not  abstain  fci  nii 
eake,  he  will  do  so  for  the  sake  of  others.  The  duty  is  plain.  Christiai 
Quiches  and  ministers  generally  concede  it.  It  is  not  strange  tli&t  Di . 
Bacon  does  not  take  issue  directly  on  this  question. 

SOME  LAW  NECESSARY. 

The  necessity  of  some  law  to  prevent  the  evils  of  intemperance  is  nn}- 
Tersally  admitted.  There  have  been  laws  in  England,  iirtended  for  tbU 
purpose,  for  centuries  ; and  we  have  always  had  such  laws  in  this  eoun- 
try.  The  use  of  into.xicating  liquors  is  one  great  source  of  poverty,  suf- 
fering, and  crime.  Lord  Mansfield  expressed  the  opinion,  two  hundred 
years  ago,  as  the  result  of  twenty  years’  judicial  observation,  that  three 
fourths  of  all  crimes,  of  every  grade,  had  their  origin  in  this  habit ; and  the 
fact  is  as  patent  now  as  it  was  then.  A vice  which  marshals  th§  multitude* 
of  prisoners  who  throng  our  criminal  courts — who  crowd  our  prisons,  oar 
asylums,  and  our  poor-houses — and  has  filled  so  many  streets  and  dwell- 
ings with  wretchedness  and  degradation,.surely  ought  to  be  prevented  by 
a suitable  law,  if  it  can  be  done. 

WHAT  SHALL  THE  LAW  BE  ? 

If  entire  abstinence  from  t^'e  use  of  liquors,  as  a beverage,  is  the  duty, 
then  entire  prohibition  of  the  sale  for  such  use  should  be  the  law.  Tlis 
one  is  the  logical  sequence  of  the  other.  The  law  should  allow  the  sal* 
for  purposes  just  co-extensive  with  the  proper  use,  and  for  no  other.  If 
over  any  proposition  was  sqjf-evident,  this  would  seem  to  be  so. 

And  this  has  always  been  the  rule  iiitenoeu.  in  every  law  on  this  subiect 
that  has  ever  been  enacted.  When  moderate  drinking  was  thought  to  b« 
the  proper  rule  of  use,  moderate  and  careful  selling  was  thought  to  be  secured 
by  the  license  laws.  The  old  laws  were  in  entire  harmony  with  the  prin- 
ciples of  abstinence  prevailing  at  the  time.  And  when  the  rule  of  duty 
in  regard  to  the  use  of  liquors  wa.s  fixed  at  entire  abstinence,  except  for  medio- 
Inal  and  mechanical  purposes,  the  proper  rule  of  law  in  regard  to  the  sah 
of  liquors  became,  by  a logical  necessity,  that  of  entire  prohibition^  except 
for  8u;a  purposes. 

And  though  it  may  be  true  that  the  license  laws  were  prohibitorr  to  a 
Sertdin  extent,  and  the  Maine  Law.  with  different  previsions,  is  prohib- 
itory to  a greater  extent,  it  does  not  follow  that  the  only  difference  is  on* 
of  “extent”  and  “method"  As  the  difference  in  the  fuadaraPEtal 
principles  of  the  tvo  systems  is  radical,  so  is  the  difference  in  the  systenw. 
The  difference  between  drinking  one  gMlon  a mouth,  for  a beverag*  and 


MAINE  LA.W  VINDICATED. 


3 


drinking  ten  gallons  in  the  same  time,  is  one  of  extent  only.  But  th« 
difference  between  drinking  one  gallon  and  drinking  none  at  all,  is  not 
one  of  extent,  but  one  of  principle.  And  this  is  the  difference  not  only 
between  the  old  and  the  new  Temperance  ideas,  but  also  between  the  old 
and  the  new  Temperance  laws.  The  dift'erence  is  radical  and  entire.  A 
law  that  allows  one  man  in  a town  to  sell,  for  every  purpose,  docs  not 
differ  from  one  that  allows  ten  to  sell,  except  in  extent.  And  it  hardly 
differs  in  that ; for  the  extent  depends  upon  the  demand ; and  one  maa 
may  sell  as  much  as  ten.  But  the  difference  between  a law  that  allows 
cae  man,  or  ten,  to  sell  for  a beverage,  and  a law  that  allow  no  one  thus 
to  sell,  is  a difference,  not  in  extent  or  method,  but  in  principle,  intent, 
snd  effect.  This  is  too  plain  to  need  argument, 

THE  SELLER,  AND  NOT  THE  DRINKER,  PUNISHED. 

This  feature  is  dwelt  upon  by  Dr.  Bacon  in  his  first  letter,  and  discussed 
with  renewed  indefiniteness  in  his  second.  In  all  his  complaints  he  does 
not  say  that  he  would  have  it  otherwise.  He  kn'  ns  very  well  that  all  the 
license  laws  that  were  ever  enacted,  have  been  exactly  like  the  Maine 
Law  in  this  respect.  This  results  from  necessity.  To  purchase  liquors, 
or  to  drink  them,  may  be  wrong  ; but  every  wrong  c^  not  be  reached 
by  law.  Laws  which  interfere  with  private  and  domestic  habits,  evea 
when  they  are  wrong,  are  enforced  with  difficulty ; and  there  must  be 
tome  limit  to  them.  He  who  sells,  and  he  who  buys  and  drinks,  both  do 
Wrong.  If  Dr.  Bacon  wants  a law  that  will  punish  both,  the  way  to  get 
tt  is  open.  But  because  one  is  not  punished,  that  is  no  reason  why  the 
)ther  should  not  be. 

The  reason  why  the  penal  line  has  been  drawn  between  the  seller  and 
the  purchaser,  including  the  one  and  not  the  other,  has  already  been 
Suggested.  It  may,  in  some  future  time,  be  extended  to  both.  But  the 
same  rule  has  been  applied  not  only  in  all  the  license  laws,  but  in  others. 
There  have  long  been  laws  in  regard  to  dealers  in  obscene  books,  not 
only  resembling  the  Maine  Law  in  this  respect,  but  in  their  provisions 
for  search,  seizure,  and  forfeiture.  Is  it  not  a little  strange  that  men 
who  find  fault  with  the  Maine  Law  have  never  complained  of  similar 
provisions  m other  laws  f 

THE  MAINE  LAW  A “ FAILURE.” 

So  its  Ofiponents  have  often  alleged.  “ The  wish  is  father  of  th« 
thought.”  So  its  friends  sometimes  have  almost  conceded.  They  have 
ioen  too  easily  discouraged.  They  have  hoped  for  results  too  large, 
and  too  soon ; and  they  have  been  disappointed.  Tire  law  has  not  been 
a failure.  It  has  already  accomplished  great  results,  though  it  has 
but  just  passed  the  ordeal  of  political  agitation  and  judicial  construction, 
in  its  struggle  for  permanent  life.  Every  new  system,  though  it  may 
ride  prosperously  in  its  first  success,  is  subject  to  the  law  of  reaction.  It 
most  enter  the  lists,  and  conquer  ^e  place  it  would  hold.  The  UaiiM 


4 


MAINE  LAW  VINDICATED. 


law  has  been  no  exception.  Even  in  Maine,  as  we  shall  see,  Its  fiiendk 
have  been,  and  still  are,  compelled  to  spend  ir.ach  of  their  strength  in 
wringing  from  its  enemies  amendment  needed  for  its  success,  instead  of 
giving  their  time  for  its  enforcement.  Much  has  been  done  in  this  re- 
spect since  the  law  was  originally  enacted ; but  some  things  remain  yet 
to  be  done.  The  period  of  growth  is  not  the  time  for  fruit,  eapechilly 
when  the  whole  counti-y  has  been  swept  by  the  storm  of  civil  strife.  That 
as  much  has  been  accomplished  as  ought  to  have  been  expected,  an  ex- 
asoination  of  the  circumstances  will  show. 

EFFECT  OF  THE  WAS. 

One  eflPect  of  a war  in  any  civilized  community  is  to  relax  the  s jreagrth 
of  penal  law.  Inter  arma  leges  sdeni  is  an  old  maxim.  The  truth  ot  thk 
ap|>ears  in  the  general  prevalence  of  crime.  This  is  peculiarly  the  case 
with  that  class  of  offenses  which  are  prevented  only  by  constant  vigi- 
lance. The  friends  of  the  Maine  Law,  without  whose  aid  it  is  never 
enforced,  have  been  among  the  most  active  in  sustaining  the  Government 
during  the  war.  Thousands  of  them  have  been  in  the  army  ; and  thoj« 
at  home,  in  their  anxiety  for  their  country,  have  avoided  everj-thing  th** 
would  create  division  among  loyal  men.  They  have,  for  this  reason, 
assented  to  the  election  of  municipal  officers  who  would  not  enforce  thr 
law.  Pernaps  rhey  could  not  have  prevented  it  if  they  had  tried.  A< 
any  rate,  ihe  result  has  been,  not  that  the  law  has  not  been  executed  a* 
all,  but  mat.  m the  cities  and  large  towns,  it  has  been  extensively  dis 
regarded.  That  the  return  of  peace  will  make  a change  in  this  respect, 
the  enemies  of  the  law  have  more  fears  than  they  confess.  Their  cry 
against  it  because  It  is  not  enloreed  is  altogether  hypocritical.  If  fhey 
did  not  fear  that  it  would  be  executed,  they  would  not  cry  at  all 
Wlien  it  shall  be  enforced,  as  It  will  again  be,  they  wlU  cry  out  against 
Vt  all  the  more,  for  that  reason. 

DJADBurATB  PENAXTIE3. 

If  the  law  had  been  the  failru-e  its  enemies  pretend,  the  result  would 
not  prove  that  prohibition  is  a mistake  ; for  prohibition  can  not  have  a 
fair  trial  by  the  law  as  it  is  n<iw.  It  is  a fact  ever  to  be  remembered  that 
the  penalties  of  the  law  have  never  been  made  what  its  friends  want  them 
to  l>e.  Its  enemies  have  dictated  terms  in  this  respect.  And  not  until 
the  friends  of  prohibition  have  been  allowed  to  try  it,  in  their  own  ^ay, 
®8n  they  be  held  responsible  for  the  result. 

The  law  in  this  State  is  probably  better  than  in  any  other.  Besides  the 
provisions  usually  inserted  in  such  laws,  a delivery  of  liquors  is  evidence 
of  a sale  ; both  distilled  and  brewed  liquors  and  wines  are  now  conclusively 
presumed  to  be  “intoxicating;”  and,  in  the  trial  of  liquor  cases,  jurors 
may  be  examined,  and  if  engaged  in  the  traffic,  they  may  be  summarily 
excluded  from  the  panel.  It  sometimes  happens  that  juries  will  not 
oenvict  when  the  evidence  is  sufficient ; but  this  is  rarely  the  case.  A 


MAINE  LAW  VINDICATED. 


s 

greater  difficulty  is  that  of  procuring  testimony ; but  persistent  effing 
will  overcome  this.  So  that  convictions  nave  been  freqsent  and  numer- 
ous in  all  parts  of  the  State. 

But  the  prohibitory  system  can  never  be  successful,  to  the  extent  of  ita 
actual  fwwer  until  every  violation  of  the  law  is  liable  to  be  punished  by 
Imprisonment,  varying  the  time  according  to  the  magnitude  of  the  offense. 

Many  able  jurists  have  doubted  the  policy  of  punishing  by  fines  alone 
tn  any  class  of  crimes.  It  gives  the  rich  an  advantage  over  the  poor,  and 
cpens  the  door  for  men  to  violate  the  law,  with  a penalty  that  is  no  actual 
punishment.  This  is  a general  result  in  aU  cases  of  punishing  by  finea 
only. 

But  when  the  offense  is  a lucrative  business  to  him  who  commits  it,  a 
fine  is  no  punishment  at  all.  Like  other  risks  or  losses,  the  probable  fines 
will  augment  the  prices,  and  the  consumer  will  have  to  pay  them.  When 
we  remember  that,  under  the  most  vigorous  enforcement  of  the  law, 
talcing  into  consideration  ordinary  difficulties  and  delays,  two  fines  of  a 
hundred  dollars  each,  and  a half  dozen  of  twenty  dollars  each,  would  be 
as  many  as  would  be  likely  to  be  imposed  upon  any  single  dealer  in 
liquors  in  a year,  we  can  see  that  many  could  pay  them,  as  they  pay  their 
rents,  and  have  a large  margin  of  profits  left.  And  if  there  is  a second 
conviction  of  the  highest  offense — the  penalty  for  which  is  imprisonment — 
the  dealer  will  then  give  up  the  business,  and  some  one  else  will  take  it 
to  go  the  same  round.  The  chances  of  escai)e  are  many  ; and  if  they  fail, 
l*rge  profits  will  pay  the  fines.  So  the  liquor-sellers  view  it ; and  they 
act  accordingly. 

It  is  clear,  therefore,  that  the  penalty  in  every  case,  besides  the  costs  of 
prosecution,  should  be  one  of  imprisonment.  Such  a punishment  it 
generally  dreaded.  There  axe  thousands  who  would  not  run  the  risk  of  it 
who  care  nothing  for  fines.  Without  it,  the  prohibition  in  such  cases  is 
but  an  empty  name. 

OTHER  LAWS  NOT  ENFORCED. 

Those  who  denounce  the  Maine  Law  because  it  is  not  enforced,  little 
know  how  plainly  it  can  be  seen  what  spirit  they  are  of.  The  whole 
secret  of  their  opposition  is  generally  a fear  that  it  will  be  enforced,  or  a 
desire  for  indulgence,  without  feeling  that  they  are  causing  it  to  b« 
violated.  For  they  are  still  more  dissatisfied  when  it  is  enforced.  In  this 
Etate  the  law  was  executed  vigorously  from  1851  to  1856 — a rather  long 
time.  Dr.  Bacon  might  presume,  for  the  broom  to  “ sweep  clean’’  becaus? 
it  was  “ new.”  And  it  has  never  been  so  thoroughly  executed  as  it  wa* 
in  1855,  when  the  same  men  were  fiercest  in  their  opposition  who  now 
l^jpose  it  on  the  ground  that  it  is  not  enforced. 

And  they  show  the  same  inconsistency  in  another  way.  For  there  ar« 
other  laws,  of  which  they  never  complain,  to  which  this  objection  might 
be  made  with  equal  force. 

Penal  laws  are  divided  into  two  clagseskin  this  respect  Those  of  one 


6 


MAINE  LAW  VINDICATED. 


cla68  are  enforced  without  any  general  effort  in  the  oommnnlty ; whtU 
those  of  the  other  class  are  not.  The  reason  is  easily  stated. 

1.  When  the  offense  injures  some  one,  in  person,  or  property,  like 
larceny,  arson,  or  murder,  the  friends  of  the  injured  party,  and  the  v?hole 
community,  are  interested  in  bringing  the  offender  to  punishment, 

2.  But  in  the  other  class  of  crimes,  like  gambling,  licentiousness,  an4 
selling  intoxicating  liquors,  there  is  no  injured  party  anxious  to  have  the 
guilty  punished.  These  offenses  can  be  committed  secretly  ; and  all  the 
parties  are  interested  in  concealing  them.  They  are,  therefore,  detected 
with  difficulty,  and  are  punished  only  by  special  effort.  And,  especially 
in  cities  and  large  towns,  the  laws  against  them  are  but  partially  enforced. 

The  Maine  Larw  is  not  peculiar  in  this  respect.  There  is  not  a large  city 
to  the  country  in  which  there  are  not  scores  of  gambling-houses  and 
Douses  of  ill-fame,  the  existence  of  which  is  well  known  to  the  inhabitants, 
•nd  to  the  authorities  ; and  yet  the  laws  against  them  are  not  enforced. 
Are  the  laws,  therefore,  wrong  f And  ought  they  to  be  changed  into 
license  laws  ? The  truth  is  (and  Temperance  men  must  not  forget  it),  this 
class  of  laws  will  always  be  extensively  violated.  The  Maine  Law,  even 
DOW,  is  enforced  far  more  thoroughly  than  the  license  laws  ever  were.  In 
proportion  to  the  number  of  people  participating  in  the  evil  to  be  sup 
pressed,  it  is  enforced  as  well  in  this  State  as  are  the  laws  to  prevent 
licentiousness. 


MORAL  INFLUENCE  OP  THE  LAW. 

Such  laws  are  not  useless,  even  in  communities  where  they  are  but 
(tarely  enforced.  As  teachers  of  the  public  conscience,  the  standard  of 
which  is  seldom  higher  than  human  law,  their  value  is  above  all  price. 
Many  a man  refrains  from  buying  intoxicating  liquors  when  he  wants 
them,  simply  because  he  must  buy  of  a violator  of  the  law  ; and  this  is 
often  the  secret  of  his  opposition  to  the  law.  He  does  not  like  to  give  his 
conscience  a chance  to  appeal  to  such  a law.  It  tends  to  make  both 
baying  and  selling  disreputable.  It  holds  up  the  standard  of  right,  and 
puts  the  brand  of  infamy  upon  the  wrong.  He  is  a blind  observer  of  ths 
forces  that  govern  in  human  life  who  does  not  see  the  moral  power  of 
penal  law,  even  when  extensively  violated^  in  teaching  virtue  and 
restraining  vice.  What  Dr.  Bacon  says  of  the  number  opposed  to  the 
Maine  loxf  may  be  true.  There  is  many  a community  in  which  the  really 
virtuous  arc  in  the  minority  ; and  yet,  by  the  tuoral  power  of  their 
principles,  they  so  mold  the  laws  and  customs,  even  of  the  majority,  that 
vice  is,  to  a great  extent,  shamed  and  powerless.  When  the  Maine  Law 
was  adopted  in  this  State,  by  the  popular  vote,  there  were  thousands  who 
would  have  voted  against  it  if  they  could  have  done  it  secretly,  who  did 
not.  It  is  only  because  of  this  inherent  weakness  of  vice,  and  this  intriusic 
power  of  virtue,  which  makes  the  wicked  cowards  and  the  righteous  bold, 
that  good  laws  can  be  secured  and  enforced  anywnere.  And  by  this  tho 
liaine  Law  can  be  executed  as  ^ell  as  others. 


MAINE  LAW  VINDICATBD. 


7 


THE  LAW  IS  ENFORGED. 

Maine  Law,  in  its  prohibitory  form,  bnt  without  the  search  end 
■ehnire  clauses,  was  first  enacted  in  this  State  in  1846.  This  first  law  was 
extensively  enforced ; and  it  prepared  the  way  for  that  of  1851.  Before 
that  time,  the  old  Temperance  reform,  and  the  Washingtonian  movement, 
had  each  successively  reached  its  climax.  And,  notwithstanding  all  the 
good  that  was  done  in  reforming  the  habits  of  the  people,  there  were  etill 
targe  numbers  accustomed  to  use  intoxicating  liqaors ; and  there  wui 
really  no  legal  restraint  upon  the  sale.  It  was  permitted  i*"  almost  every 
town;  nearly  every  tavern,  in  country  and  in  city,  had  its  “bar;”  at 
almost  every  village  and  “ corner”  was  a grog-shop  ; and,  in  most  places 
of  that  kind,  more  than  one,  where  old  men  and  young  spent  their  earn- 
ings in  dis.sipation  ; men  helplessly  drunk  in  the  streets,  and  by  the  way- 
side, were  a common  sight ; and  at  elections,  at  military  trainings  and 
musters,  and  at  other  public  gatherings,  there  were  scenes  of  debauchery 
and  riot  enough  to  make  one  ashamed  of  his  race. 

What  has  become  of  this  mass  of  corruption  and  disgusting  vice  ? It 
seems  so  much  like  some  horrid  dream  of  the  past  that  we  can  hardly 
realize  that  it  was  real  and  visible  until  twenty  years  ago.  The  Maine 
Law  has  swept  it  away  forever.  In  some  of  our  cities  something  of  the 
kind  may  still  be  seen.  But  in  three  fourths  of  the  towns  in  this  State 
such  scenes  would  now  no  more  be  tolerated  than  would  the  revolting 
orgies  of  savages.  A stranger  may  pass  through,  stop  at  a hotel  in  each 
city,  walk  the  streets  in  some  of  them,  and  go  away  with  the  belief  that 
our  law  is  a failure.  But  no  observing  man  who  has  lived  in  the  State 
for  twenty  years,  and  ]jas  had  an  opportunity  to  know  the  facts,  can  doubt 
that  the  Maine  Law  has  produced  a hundred  times  more  visible  improve- 
ment in  the  character,  condition,  and  prosperity  of  our  people  than  anj 
other  law  that  was  ever  enacted. 

I have  always  resided  in  this  State.  At  the  bar  I assisted  in  conducting 
to  a successful  result  scores,  if  not  hundreds,  of  prosecutions  against  liquor' 
sellers,  under  the  statutes  of  1846  and  1851.  Having  since  1856  served 
for  nearly  ten  years  as  one  of  the  associate-justices  of  our  Supreme  Court, 
I have  tried  many  cases,  against  common  sellers,  in  different  counties, 
from  one  extreme  of  the  State  to  the  other.  And  notwithstanding  ths 
unfaithfulness  or  timidity  of  Temperance  men,  the  difficulties  of  enforcing 
the  law,  the  inadequacy  of  its  penalties,  and  the  effect  of  the  war  in 
retarding  its  execution,  I am  convinced,  by  what  I have  seen,  that  it  hai 
accomplished  an  incalculable  amount  of  good.  Of  our  four  hundred 
towns  and  cities,  making  the  estimate  below  what  I believe  the  facta 
would  justify,  I am  satisfied  that  in  more  than  one  hundred  the  law 
prevents  any  sale  of  liquors  whatever  for  a beverage.  In  at  least  two 
hundred  of  them  it  is  -sold  only  in  the  way  that  Doctor  Bacon  calls  “ on 
the  sly,”  just  as,  in  the  same  towns,  there  are  persons  guilty  of  lewdnest 
and  other  crimes. 

bi  most  of  the  other  one  hundred  towns  liquors  are  sold  probably  witl^ 


8 


MAINE  LAW  VINDICATED. 


eot  mnch  restraint.  But  in  these  the  trafl&c  generally  shrinks  from  tfc« 
public  gaze,  conscious  of  its  guilt  and  shame.  And,  though  the  law  ii 
but  partially  enforced,  prosecutions  under  it  are  numerous  and  constant, 
even  in  places  where  large  quantities  are  sold.  The  condition  of  things, 
therefore,  even  in  such  places,  is  far  better  than  ever  it  was  under  the 
license  laws. 

Such  I believe  to  be  a fair  statement  of  the  existing  facts  and  circuni 
etances  connected  with  the  Maine  Law  in  this  State.  It  is  not  claim^i 
liiat  they  prove  our  law  to  be  executed  as  faithfully  as  it  ought  to  be  ; nor 
^at  imder  it,  or  any  other  law,  the  improper  sale  and  use  of  intoxicating 
fiqnors  can  ever  be  entirely  suppressed.  But  it  is  claimed  that  they  prove 
the  Maine  Law,  even  with  its  inadequate  penalties  to  be  far  superior  to 
any  iicense  laws ; and  that  there  is  no  such  failure  to  enforce  it  as  will 
justify  either  the  friends  or  the  enemies  of  the  Temperance  reform  in 
opposing  it.  And  if  such  men  as  Dr.  Bacon,  and  many  others  that  might 
be  named,  instead  of  carping  at  it,  or  at  best  refusing  to  advocate  it, 
would  come  out  publicly,  and  give  it  a cordial  and  hearty  support,  itj 
provisions  would  soon  be  made  more  stringent,  the  tone  of  public  senti- 
ment in  regard  to  it  would  become  higher  and  stronger*  and  its  more 
vigorous  execution  would  soon  make  it  a terror  to  multitudesof  evil-doer* 
who  now  trample  it  under  foot.  Is  not  the  question  of  duty  with  such 
men  oue  of  vast  moment?  If  they  oppose  the  Maine  Law,  for  whatever 
reason,  every  rum-seller  in  the  land  will  have  reason  to  rejoice.  If  they 
are  silent  in  regard  to  it,  wlrile  thousands  are  every  year  swept  away  in 
the  great  flood  of  intemperance,  they  are  each  practically  saying — “ Whai 
Is  that  to  me  ?”  “ Am  I my  brother's  keeper?”  The  day  is  coming  that 

will  give  the  answer. 


PiniT.TsnF.n  bt  THE  National  Tempebance  Societt  ajto  PcBLicAnow 
StocflE,  No  58  Seale  Btbeet,  two  doobs  west  or  Bboalwae, 
Kbv  lonx,  AX  $3  rn  TxoomA?ii>. 


No.  3U. 


REVIEW  OF 


EX-GOT.  ANDREW  ON  LICENSE. 


BY  EEV.  WM,  ir.  raATER. 


STRIPPED  of  ita  verbiage  and  sophisms,  the  late  speecn  of  ba- 
Governor  Andrew  in  favor  of  License  is  without  a parallel  to* 
teckJera  statements  and  pernicious  teachings. 

HE  TEACHES 

1.  That  “ alcohol  is  food.”  He  puts  it  in  “ the  category  of  foods” 
(p.  14);  says  that  it  “ acts  as  a food”  (p.  15) ; speaks  of  it  as  an  articla 
“ of  diet”  (p.  125),  and  as  having  “ dietetic  uses and  censures  prohibi- 
tionists for  maintaining  their  views  “in  spite  of  the  fact  that  those 
drinks  are  foods”  (p.  41). 

The  last  report  of  our  “ State  Board  of  Charities”  furnishes  a sufficient 
answer  to  such  an  absurd  teaching,  when  it  says  of  the  criminals  Vi  the 
State  (p.  202),  “ About'iticu  thirds  are  set  down  as  intemperate,  but  *ia 
number  is  known  to-  be  too  small.  Probably  more  than  eighty  per  cen, 
come  within  this  class — intemperance  being  the  chief  occasion  of  crime, 
as  it  is  of  pauperism,  and  (in  a less  degree)  of  insanity.”  Thus  criminals 
who  drink  the  most  whisky  get  the  most  of  this  sort  of  “ food,”  and  it 
appears  to  nourish  them  only  in  sin!  These  facta  we  bring  against 
Mr.  A.’s  theory. 

He  teaches  that  alcohol  is  food,  in  order  to  show  that  the  Legislature 
can  not  prohibit  its  sale.  He  says  (p.  40),  “ If  that  classification  [class- 
ing  alcohol  with  foods]  is  correct,  then  there  is  an  end  to  the  contiTi- 
versy.  For  then  it  can  not  be  held  that  the  Government  ought  to 
prohibit  the  citizen  from  making  up  his  own  bill  of  fare  for  himself." 
Mark,  here  is  also  a claim  that  alcohol  is  “ diet”  in  the  sense  that  beef  ia 
diet,  80  that  each  citizen  should  control  it  as  “ his  own  bill  of  fare." 
His  retisoning  rests  upon  the  false  assumption,  that  prohibitionists  base 
their  legislation  upon  “ the  essentially  poisoncnis  character  of  alcoholic 


2 


RETIEW  OP  EX-GOV.  AXUP.E'W  ON  LiCENSB, 


be'oerages"  (p.  11).  We  deny  that  the  Prohibitory  Law  was  enacte«i 
because  alcohol  is  a “poisoii."  Our  courts,  pnsons,  poor-houses,  asylums, 
broken  hearts,  and  miserable  homes  declared  that  a greater  part  o»‘ 
crime  and  pauperism  was  created  by  strong  drink,  and  therefore  thi 
law  was  enacted.  If  even  milk  caused  so  much  evil,  we  woul  1 pro 
bihit  its  sale  for  the  public  good.  On  page  58,  Mr.  Andrew  inquiiem, 
ifter  speaking  of  the  fact  that  saltpeter,  though  poisonous,  is  used  Lb 
* curing  of  hams,”  “ Shall  we  say  that  a sandwich  is  poisonous,  and 
SUouid  be  prohibited  by  law?”  We  answer.  Yes,  when  sandwiches 
oecomc  the  “ chief  occasion  of  crime,  pauperism,  and  insanity”  in  the 
fltate,  as  our  Board  of  Charities  say  is  true  of  strong  drink.  There  is 
no  more  reason  why  sandwiches  or  milk  should  be  permitted  to  be 
sold  than  rum,  if  they  were  the  occasion  of  as  much  social  and  moral 
mischief.  The  public  good  would  require  the  suppression  of  their 
sale. 

One  of  Mr.  Andrew’s  favorite  authorities.  Professor  Liebig,  whom  he 
claims  as  being  on  his  side  of  the  question,  amusingly  explodes  the 
idea  of  “ diet”  in  beer,  of  which  Mr.  A.  speaks  on  page  IG.  Professor 
L.  says  of  Bavarian  beer,  which  is  considered  the  most  “nutritious” 
and  “ best “We  can  prove  with  mathematical  certainty  that  as  much 
Jlour  as  can  lie  on  the  point  of  a table-knife  is  more  nutritious  than  eight 
quarts  of  the  best  Bavarian  beer;  that  a person  who  is  able  to  consume 
daily  that  amount  (two  gallons)  of  beer  obtains  from  it  in  a uhole  year, 
in  the  most  favorable  case,  exactly  the  amount  of  nutritive  constituents 
which  is  contained  in  a five-pound  loaf  of  bread  or  in  three  pounds  of 
flesh."  (The  italics  are  the  Professor’s.)  That  is,  in  730  gallons  (two 
gallons  per  day  for  a year)  there  is  no  more  nutriment  than  there  is 
“ in  three  pounds  of  flesh.”  Think  of  a man  driukiug  730  gallons  for 
this  morsel  of  “ food  !”  As  he  would  use  with  (Jther  food  as  many  as 
150  pounds  of  meat  annually,  then  he  must  drink  fifty  times  730  gal- 
.jis  in  order  to  obtain  in  one  }'ear  as  much  nutrition  as  he  does  from 
his  meat,  which  is  36,500 — equal  to  about  three  barrels  per  day  ! 1 

2.  That  the  human  constitution  demands  intoxicating  liquors  even 
In  health.  Of  coiu'se  this  would  follow  from  his  assumption  that 
“ alcohol  is  food.”  He  sa3^s  (p.  20),  “ Stimulants  are  only  energetic 
stimuli.  Now  all  living  acts  require  stimuli — the  eye  light,  the 
stomach  food,”  etc.  His  argument  is  actuallj'  this:  The  stomack 
requires  stimulants;  alcohol  is  a stimulant;  therefore  the' stomacli 
requires  alcohol.  In  the  same  way  he  might  prove  the  claim  of  gun* 
powder  as  an  “ article  of  diet,”  for  that  is  a stimulant.  Soldiers  put  it 
Into  their  whisky  to  stimulate  them  to  deeds  of  daring.  His  argument 
would  be:  The  stomach  requires  stimulants ; gunpowder  is  a stimulant  • 
therefore  tlie  stomach  requires  gunpowder ! 

He  puts  in  a plea  for  alcohol  as  a “ diet”  for  the  healthy  laboring 
man.  “The  laboring  man,”  he  says  (p.  17),  “who  can  hardly  finrf 


REVIEW  OP  EX-GOV.  ANDREW  ON  LICENSE. 


3 


bread  and  meat  enough  to  preserve  the  balance  between  the  formation 
and  decay  of  his  tissues,  finds  in  alcohol  an  agent  which,  if  taken  in 
moderation,  enables  him  to  dispense  with  a certain  quantity  of  food.” 
The  only  reply  we  desire  to  make  to  this  statement  is  this : An  Engli.sh 
paper  recently  reported  that  a benevolent  lady  inquired  of  a wretched 
mother  in  the  purlieus  of  London  as  to  the  cause  of  the  emaciated  con- 
dition, of  her  children,  and  the  degraded  mother  answered:  “They 
don’t  eat  much— not  enough  to  noicrish  them  without  gin-and-water.^ 
That  is  the  ex-Govemor’s  theory  reduced  to  practice  I 

3.  That  ignorance  and  poverty  are  the  chief  causes  of  crime  instead 
cf  intemperance.  He  says  (p.  48),  “ It  is  not  true  that  it  [drunken  ucsbI 
is  the  parent  or  essential  cause  without  which  they  would  not  have 
been.”  On  pages  83-92  will  be  found  his  argument  that  ignorance 
and  poverty  are  the  chief  causes  of  crime.  He  thus  boldly  denies  the 
statistics  of  our  courts,  prisons,  alms-houses,  and  Boards  of  Charities — 
the  first  important  denial  of  these  facts  since  the  beginning  of  the 
Temperance  Reform ! On  pages  88,  89  is  an  attempt  to  explain  away 
the  statistics  of  our  “ State  Board  of  Charities”  that  is  unworthy  the 
character  of  any  man  who  lays  claim  to  learning  or  candor.  But  this 
is  necessary  to  carry  his  point.  And  if  he  presumed  upon  his  “ popu- 
larity” to  establish  this  position  against  the  settled  convictions  of  lead- 
ing men  for  two  generations,  the  fact  rather  damages  his  avowal  that 
“ learning  is  modest"  (p.  43). 

4.  That  teetotalers  are  physically  more  feeble  than  moderate  drinkers 
(pp.  29,  30),  and  “ break  down  almost  invariably,  after  a certain  num- 
ber of  years ;”  and  that  their  “ offspring  become  in  a generation  or  two 
enervated  in  mind  and  body”  (p.  146).  Such  a declaration  in  New 
England,  in  the  middle  of  the  nineteenth  century,  shows  the  utter 
recklessness  with  which  ability  will  sometimes  uphold  wrong.  He 
quotes  one  Dr.  Bnnton  on  this  point,  who  nevertheless  says,  “ Those 
medicines  which  really  do  benefit  our  patients,  act  in  one  way  or 
another  as  foods,  and  that  some  of  the  most  decidedly  poisonous  sub- 
stances are  those  which  offer,  in  the  form  of  small  doses,  the  strongest 
example  of  a true  food -action.”  The  reader  will  observe  that  Dr.  B. 
does  not  consider  alcohol  “ food”  any  more  than  he  does  rhubarb, 
arsenic,  or  saltpeter.  Quite  a different  “food”  from  that  which  Mr. 
Andrew  would  have  us  think  alcohol  is,  though  equally  absurd,  since 
it  converts  our  apothecaries  into  “ common  victuallers  !" 

5.  That  intoxicating  liquors  have  been  important  agents  in  the 
icivilization  )f  mankind.  He  says,  “ No  nation  known  to  us  has  evei 
passed  into  the  inventive  condition  of  even  rudimentary  civilization 
without  largely  indulging  in  the  stimulant  of  alcohol”  (p.  21).  Then  a 
grog-shop  is  a sign  of  civilization  ! ! It  is  just  as  true,  however,  that 
“ no  nation  has  passed  into  the  inventive  condition  of  even  rudimentary 
dvilization”  without  lying ; but  this  fact  furnishes  no  indorsement  ^ 


4 


EEVIEW  OF  EX-GOV.  AJJDEEW  ON  LICENSE. 


the  Bin.  That  such  a statement  has  no  foundation  ^ hatever  in  truth, 
must  appear  to  any  one  who  will  ask,  what  alcohol  had  to  do  with 
the  invention  of  the  cotton-gin,  railroads,  steamboats,  the  telegraph, 
Atlantic  cable,  etc.,  etc.  Had  such  a statement  been  made  by  an  im- 
moderate drinker,  the  public  would  have  credited  it  to  alcohol  as  a 
“ stimulant”  rather  than  “ food !” 

6.  More  revolting  still,  he  ascribes  the  evil  effects  of  alcohol  “ to  Ifit 
fascination,  of  its  virtue,  the  potency  of  its  effects”  (p.  21),  which  is 
equally  true  of  gambling  and  licentiousness.  “ Were  it  less  alluring” 
he  adds,  “ it  would  not  lure  to  excess  ; were  it  less  potent,  it  would  not  lecep 
into  such  flames  of  fiery  exultation.”  Then  the  attraction  of  sin  is  ita 
recommendation,  and  the  most  reckless  plunge  of  its  votaries  into  hell 
the  proof  of  “ the  potency  of  its  effects!” 

7.  That  the  Temperance  Reform  has  done  no  good,  but  has  proved 
a failure ; and  he  ascribes  the  change  in  drinking  habits  and  customs 
“ to  the  same  cause  which  has  purified  literature,”  etc.  (p.  76).  Of 
course,  his  remarks  apply  with  equal  force  to  slavery,  so  that  all  his 
anti-slavery  efforts  have  proved  futile,  •*  the  same  universal  spirit,  and 
the  same  unerring  law  which  renders  it  ‘ more  blessed  to  give  than  to 
receive’  ” (p.  77),  being  the  real  cause  of  its  overthrow.  He  affirms 
directl}^  on  page  74,  that  “ drunkenness  will  disappear  as  the  light  shinxs 
in  on  the  darkened  intellect,  as  opportunity  develops  manhood,  as  hope  visits 
and  encourages  the  heart.”  Why,  then,  have  a license  law,  or  any  other 
law? 

8.  That  even  Tejiperance  creates  poverty.  He  shows  (pp.  49-52) 
that  Spain  is  a remarkably  temperate  nation,  and  yet  is  “ nfiserably 
and  frightfully  poor,”  as  if  her  temperance  were  the  cause  of  her 
poverty.  Briefly  his  argument  is — Spain  is  “ frightfully  poor yet 
Spain  is  very  temperate;  therefore  temperance  creates  poverty.  In 
the  same  way  we  might  prove  that  intemperance  has  made  England 
rich  1 England  is  rich ; yet  England  is  very  intemperate ; therefore 
intemperance  made  England  rich.  He  utterlj'  ignores  the  agency  of 
Christianity  in  elevating  nations,  when  a child  can  see  that  Protestant 
Europe  is  far  in  advance  of  Papal  Europe.  As  reasonably  hold  tliat 
the  eating  of  vegetables  creates  a blood-thirst}'  spirit  by  the  argument, — 
the  Malays  live  on  vegetables;  but  the  Malays  are  a blood-thirsty 
people ; therefore  vegetables  make  men  blood-tliirsty. 

9.  That  the  evils  of  intemperance  are  a trifling  matter.  In  addition 
to  the  foregoing,  he  says  (p.  116),  “ The  proof  is  clear,  that  neither  mor- 
litlity,  nor  insanity,  nor  any  of  the  fatal  exhibitions  of  intemperance, 
bad  as  they  are,  aflbrd  any  ground  for  panic.”  He  says  that  alcohol  baa 
been  “ selected  for  special  reprobation  without  cause”  (p.  21).  In  speak- 
ing of  the  traffic  in  strong  drink,  he  uses  such  phrases  as  “ in  matters 
innocent  in  themselves”  (p.  96),  and  he  declares  that  our  liquor  laws 
ure  “ earwtinal”  only  “ because  they  are  made  so,  or  coded  so”  (p.  128).  H« 


EBVIEW  OF  EX-GOV.  ANDREW  ON  LICENSE. 


i 


says  that  “Ninon  de  I’Enclos  was  made  tipsy  on  soup,  and  couvalea 
cents  have  been  said  to  get  drunk  on  a beefsteak”  (p.  20).  The  trifling 
and  even  dishonest  nature  of  this  remark  oecomes  more  conspicuous 
when  we  consider  that  he  appeals  to  “ common  experience"  (i).  16)  to 
prove  that  ale,  beer,  and  cider  are  not  poisonous.  Does  “ common  ex 
fmrknce"  prove  that  beefsteak  intoxicates?  When  the  reader  sees  a 
“ tipsy”  man,  does  he  infer  that  he  has  been  eating  “soup?” 

10.  That  Temperance  legislation  is  an  attempt  "to  make  men  good  and 
^Tiuoue  by  Act  of  Parliament"  (p.  132),  a fallacy  as  old  as  the  doctrine 
that  “ alcohol  is  food.”  Legislation  does  not  attempt  to  make  rum- 
scllcrs  “ good  and  virtuous but  it  prevents  their  doing  mischief,  and 
protects  sulfering  tvomen  and  children.  The  legislation  that  punishes 
gamblers  and  thieves  does  not  make  them  “ good  and  virtuous ;”  but 
it  protects  society,  and  affords  better  opportunity  for  moral  agencies  to 
work  a reformation. 

11.  That  a little  alcohol  is  nourishing,  while  much  of  it  is  poisonous 
(p.  37).  As  if  a small  dose  of  any  article  were  not  the  saaue  in  nature 
as  a large  dose ! As  if  a grain  of  arsenic  were  not  a poison  as  really  as 
a pound  ! We  hold  that  a little  alcohol  is  a poison  as  really  as  much, 
though  it  may  do  less  harm.  Then  his  illustration  to  establish  this 
position  furnislies  no  parallel.  From  the  fact  that  the  atmosphere,  com- 
posed of  one  foui'th  oxygen  and  three  fourths  nitrogen,  is  life-support- 
ing, while  it  would  bo  “ a poison"  if  it  contained  only  oxygen,  he  con- 
cludes that  the  same  is  true  of  alcohol.  His  argument  is : Oxygen  is 
required  to  support  life ; a little  oxygen  supports  it  while  a good  deal 
destroys  it;  therefore  a little  alcohol  is  nutritious,  while  much  is 
poisonous.  The  unfairness  and  want  of  candor  in  such  an  argument 
is  apparent  when  we  consider  that  alcohol  is  not  found  in  nature,  as 
Professor  Liebig  says.  God  made  oxygen  to  support  life,  and  it  is 
found  in  nature.  Alcohol  is  the  product  of  decay  or  rottenness,  and  is 
nothing  that  God  created  to  bless  the  world,  as  he  did  oxygen,  so  that 
the  two  things  can  not  justly  be  compared  in  their  effects. 

12.  That  Mahometanism  is  inferior  to  Christianity  because  Mahmnei 
prohibited  wine-drinking,  and  not  because  the  former  has  no  claim  to  a 
divine  origin,  while  the  latter  has  (pp.  142-’61.  An  able  writer  very 
properly  inferred  from  this  position  of  Mr.  Andrew,  “ He  believes  that 
a people  are  endowed  with  a capacity  to  become  great  and  good  pre- 
cisely in  proportion  to  their  capacity  to  drink  what  is  commonly  known 
as  ‘ liquor !’  ” 

13.  That  drunkenness  was  a providential  blessing  to  Englishmen 
ene  hundred  years  ago.  When  “ disease,  filth,  ignorance,  licentioua 
manners,  neglect  of  human  want  and  woe,  judicial  cr  lelty  and  pauper- 
ism” needed  “ ouly'^  drunicenness  to  complete  the  picture”  (p.  59), 
Divine  Providence  mercifully  “ permitted  so  many  to  yield  to  this 
merely  selfish  indulgence  of  brutish  menf  in  order  to  “ sore  them  from 


0 


KEVIEW  OF  EX-GOV.  ANDKEW  ON  LICENSE. 


btcoming  human  devils"  (p.  60).  This  theory  proposes  to  sdve  men  Iron 
one  vice  by  plunging  them  into  another ! ! ! 

14.  That  the  liquor  traffic  is  both  respectable  and  useful.  (See  pp. 
47, 134.)  If  one  half  of  the  foregoing  teachings  are  true,  then  the  liquol 
traffic  must  be  honorable  and  necessary;  hence  his  object  in  pre.ssing 
the  points  enumerated.  Concisely  stated  his  argument  is — It  is  respect- 
able  and  useful  to  furnish  a necessary  article  “ of  diet;”  ‘‘  liquors”  are 
ft  necessary  article  “ of  diet ;”  therefore  it  is  a'  respectable  and  useful 
business  to  traffic  in  “ liquors.”  He  bcldly  denies  the  “ dogmas  of  the 
prohibitionists,”  and  censures  them  fcr  “stigmatizing”  rumselleis  as 
“ criminals,”  “ challenging  the  philosophy  of  their  movement,  the  fit- 
ness of  -their  methods,  their  consistency  with  libertj',  with  progress, 
and  with  the  ultimate  good”  (p.  117).  And  he  claims  that  a large 
number  of  people,  “ intellectual,  revered,  and  noble,”  are  with  him  in 
thus  combating  Prohibition  and  defending  the  traffic. 

CONTRADICTIONS. 

The  number  of  contradictions  in  the  ex-Govemor’s  speech  will 
surprise  even  his  admirei-s.  The  more  prominent  are  as  follows : 

He  opposes  our  Prohibitory  Law  because  it  invades  the  private 
rights  of  men  who  want  to  sell  liquors  (pp.  94, 128),  and  then  advocates 
ft  License  Law  that  permits  not  more  than  one  in  a thousand  of  the 
citizens  to  engage  in  the  traffic,  with  severe  penalties  for  the  999  who 
may  dare  to  sell  without  license  (pp.  124,  125). 

He  overlooks  the  fact  that,  if  the  State  has  a right  to  license  the 
traffic,  it  must  have  the  right  to  prohibit  it. 

He  denounces  the  present  Temperance  legislation,  as  “ a monopoly’' 
(pp.  123,  127),  and  yet  he  permits  only  about  one  in  a thousand  of 
the  people  to  sell  intoxicating  driulcs;  and  these  few  shall  be  the  rich 
rum-sellers  who  can  pay  largely  for  a license. 

On  the  48th  page  he  denies  that  drunkenness  is  the  “ essential  cause” 
of  crime ; and  yet,  on  page  74  he  says,  “ crime  and  tippling  are  so 
linked  together,  tliat  if  we  could  banish  tippling,  the  judges  have  a 
thousand  times  declared  that  criane,  unable  to  live  alone,  would  follow, 
too.”  Then  why  license  the  “tippling?”  we  ask. 

While  he  introduced  many  witnesses  to  show  that  our  liquor  lawa 
have  demoralized  the  community  by  increasing  the  sale,  he  proves,  on 
page  92,  that  there  was  less  crime  in  1866  (when  the  laws  began  to  be 
thoroughly  enforced),  than  there  was  “ before  the  war.”  Then,  too,  it 
must  follow,  if  there  was  less  crime  in  1866,  and  a greater  “ flow  of  bad 
whisky”  (p.  92),  that  the  more  drinking  there  is,  the  less  crime  e.xists. 
The  e.x-Governor  must  share  the  fame  of  making  this  modern 
discovery. 

He  tried  to  prove  by  testimony  that  the  community  is  more  cor- 
rapted  by  drink  now  than  it  was  before  the  enactment  of  our  Pro 


EEVIBW  OF  BX-GOV.  ANDREW  ON  LICEN8B.  7 

hibitory  Law ; and  still  he  argues  that  “ ignorance,”  etc.,  instead  M 
drink,  produce  pauperism  and  crime. 

He  denies  that  law  can  produce  any  effect  upon  the  drinking  usages, 
and  still  he  opposes  the  Prohibitory  Law  because  its  effect  is  very  bad. 
Then  he  adds  another  contradiction  to  this,  by  urging  that  his  license 
law  will  have  a very  good  effect  (pp.  124, 125). 

While  he  stoutly  holds  that  our  Prohibitoiy  Law  has  worked  mis- 
chief, he  declares  that  “ it  has  existed  only  in  name"  (p.  107),  and  “ never 
xeiU,  be  made  to  work"  (p.  124).  It  has  proved  “ a failure,"  and  yet  hag 
driven  the  traffic  into  “ secret  places!"  How  a law  can  work  mischief 
that  can  not  “ be  made  to  work”  at  all,  needs  explanation  ! 

While  he  thus  condemns  the  Prohibitory  Law  as  wro.'ig  in  principle 
and  evil  in  practice,  he  nevertheless  proposes  at  last  to  retain  it  in  con- 
nection wdth  his  license  law.  And  while  he  affirms  that  it  can  not  be 
enforced,  he  retains  it  for  licensed  liquor  dealers  to  use  in  punishing 
their  unlicensed  neighbors,  thus  admitting  that  even  the  few  licensed 
dealers  can  accomplish  what  he  believes  the  whole  State  can  not  do  now. 
At  the  same  time,  by  retaining  the  Prohibitory  Law,  and  making  his 
license  law  an  adjunct  to  it,  he  admits  that  his  law  can  not  work  with- 
out it.  Nor  is  this  all.  By  retaining  the  present  law,  after  his  masterly 
efforts  to  break  it  down,  he  pays  it  the  greatest  tribute  possible.  That 
is,  he  bestows  upon  it  both  the  greatest  blame  and  the  greatest 
praise. 

He  proves  that  “ liquors”  are  “ food,”  and  so  necessary  to  men  in  health 
even,  that  the  “ laboring  man  who  can  hardly  find  bread  and  meat 
enough,”  can  supply  the  deficiency  with  rum,  and  “ dispense  with  a 
certain  quantity  of  food nevertheless  he  proposes  the  passage  of  a 
license  law  that  prohibits  the  sale  to  minors,  students,  drunkards,  etc., 
thus  withholding  them  from  one  half  of  the  people  of  the  State!  Why 
should  not  the  poor  “ laboring  man”  twenty  years  old  have  this  need- 
ful “ diet”  as  well  as  he  who  is  twenty-one  years  old  ? Why  should  it 
be  sold  to  a clerk  in  Boston  and  not  to  a student  of  Harvard  College, 
especially  when  the  medical  professors  of  that  institution  indorse  ita 
ase  ? 

He  holds  that  intoxicating  drinks  are  legitimate  articles  of  commerce, 
as  we  have  seen ; and  then  proposes  a law  that  prevents  990  persons 
of  eveiy  thousand  from  engaging  in  that  commerce. 

He  denounces  the  Prohibitory  Law  for  two  directly  opposite  effects. 
1.  I’roving  by  his  witnesses  that  it  increases  the  sale  and  use  of  liquors, 
thus  doing  a public  wrong.  2.  By  declaring  that  its  restriction  of  the 
sale  invades  private  rights  (pp.  95,  96,  128-132). 

He  contends  tliat  it  increases  the  provocations  to  drunkenness,  to 
drive  the  traffic  into  secret';  that  is,  temptations  are  increased  by 
removing  temptations.  And  then  he  teaches  that  it  is  good  to  bs 
tempted  (p.  147). 


8 REVIEW  OF  EI-GOV.  AITDEEW  ON  LICENSE. 

This  argument  is  much  like  his  general  one,  that  “ alcohol  is  food  ;* 
and  the  Prohibitory  Law  is  bad  because  it  supplies  it.  If  his  premisa 
v?erc  “alcohol  is  a poison''  then  his  argument  that  the  law  increases 
Ihe  sale,  and  therefore  must  be  repealed,  would  have  been  consistent 
But  now  that  “ alcohol  is  food,"  in  his  view,  it  is  not  a mischievous 
that  supplies  it.  That  must  be  a verj'  benevolent  law  that  can 
provide  the  poor  “laboring  man”  with  this  substitute  for  “bread  and 
meat”  so  that  he  can  “ dispense  with  a certain  quantity  of  the  latter.” 
Besides,  he  has  completely  upset  this  part  of  his  argument  in  anothei 
place  by  defending  the  sale  of  liquor  as  respectable,  on  the  ground  that 
it  furnishes  a necessary  “ diet.” 

Finally,  after  all  his  attacks  upon  the  Prohibitory  Law,  pronouncing 
it  a ^‘■failure;"  declaring  that  it  neter  was  and  never  can  he  enforced  ; 
that  it  invades  private  rights ; that  the  people  are  opposed  to  it;  that  it 
increases  drunkenness  ; that  its  penalties  are  unjust ; that  it  dhninishcs 
respect  for  law,  etc.,  etc. ; to  propose  to  retain  it,  with  its  seizure  clause 
and  penalties,  in  order  to  make  his  license  law  work,  is  the  greatest 
CONTRADICTION  of  all ! 

We  challenge  the  most  extensive  reader  to  produce  another  such 
literary  medley  as  ex-Govemor  Andrew’s  speech.  It  is  not  to  be 
found  in  the  English  language.  And  who  can  show  that  it  is  great  in 
any  sense,  except  in  sopmsiis,  unfounded  statements,  and  bold  coH- 

TRADICTIONS  ? 

His  own  words  (p.  103)  furnish  us  with  a fitting  close  to  this  tract. 
“ When  we  depart  from  the  simplicity  of  truth  as  it  is  found  in  nature, 
in  the  lives  of  the  great  exemplars  of  our  race,  and  in  revealed  religion, 
and  go  to  hewing  out  for  ourselves  the  broken  cisterns  of  merely  human 
ingenuity,  we  are  not  unlikely  to  run  the  experiment  into  palpable 
extremes.” 


Published  by  the  National  Tempebance  Society  and  Publioabm 
SotraY,  No.  68  Beads  Street,  two  doobs  west  of  Bboadvax, 

New  Yobs,  $6  peb  Thousand. 


No.  34. 

INDICTMENT  OF  THE  RUM  TRAFFIC. 


Bt  Eev.  W.  W.  IIicks. 


RIENDS  AND  FELLOW-CITIZENS:  Dear  our  appeal.  We  speak 


•I-'  in  behalf  of  every  dear  interest.  The  questions  that  disturb  ns  and 
that  demand  our  immediate  attention  are  home  and  heart  questions, 
and  propound  themselves  to  all. 

Shall  rum  rule  and  ruin  ? 

What  shall  be  done — shall  anything  be  done — to  regulate  and  uproot 
an  evil  which  all  acknowledge,  which  is  fearfully  on  the  increase,  and 
whose  terrible  havoc  and  contributions  all  dread? 

The  rum  traffic  is  an  unmitigated  evil.  Not  one  honest  word  can  be 
said  in  its  favor.  All  other  trades  have  just  and  honorable  foimdations ; 
but  this  is  the  trade  of  deatli. 

It  has  no  regard  for  honor.  It  knows  no  truce.  It  hears  no  cry  of 
remonstrance — no  appeal  for  quarter. 

It  is  savage  and  relentless. 

It  is  insidious  to  the  last  degree — stealing  upon  its  victims  with  the 
subtlety  of  a serpent;  finding  its  refuge  in  a licensed  bar-room;  and 
under  that  certificate  sallies  forth  on  its  dreadful  mission,  prowling 
through  our  land  with  locks  and  hands  and  garments  red  and  dripping 
with  innocent  blood. 

It  dogs  the  step  of  the  husband  and  father  until  he  falls  into  ita 
hungry  jaws. 

It  patiently  tracks  the  unthinking  youth  until,  by  deceit  and  intrigue, 
he  yields  to  its  charms. 

It  hides  in  the  gorgeous  halls  of  the  rich,  and  crouches  low  in  the 
hovels  of  the  poor,  to  blind  and  destroy. 

It  has  devastated  a larger  area  than  war,  or  famine,  or  pestilence. 

It  has  blasted  more  homes  and  broken  more  hearts  than  all  these 
combined. 

It  has  claimed  freedom  from  regulation  and  intrenched  itself  behind 
decisions  of  law. 

It  has  increased  its  force,  multiplied  its  attractions,  and  widened  ita 
avenues  of  infamy,  until  they  are  the  unsightly  gildings  of  every  street 
and  the  blazing  attractions  of  every  corner. 

It  has  employed  all  means  to  entrap  and  hold  fast  the  youth  of  our 
(and — by  nightly  entertainments  of  music,  whose  sounds,  in  themselves 
innocent  and  inspiring,  decoy  to  death ; by  arraying  temptation,  in  th« 


AU  APPEAL. 


fair  form  of  woman,  whose  charms  and  attractions,  robbed  of  virtne,  an 
prostituted  to  vice. 

It  has  hurled  defiance  at  the  God  of  heaven,  and  witn  impunity  in 
suited  a Christian  people,  by  disregarding  the  sanctity  and  claims  ol 
the  holy  Sabbath,  making  greater  exertions  on  that  day  in  its  destruc- 
tive work,  and  filling  our  streets  with  drunkards  and  brawlers,  and  im- 
posing heavy  burdens  upon  the  charities  and  loyalty  of  the  sober  and 
Christian  public. 

It  has  raised  large  sums  of  money  to  buy  protection  from  youi 
reckoning  and  vengeance  : to  buy  shelter  from  the  wrath  and  curse 
of  mothers  whose  sons  have  fallen  by  its  keen  blade  ; from  wives  whoso 
husbands  come  to  them  no  more  in  peace,  love  and  fidelty  ; from  chil- 
dren whose  parents  have  been  sent  to  untimely  and  dishonored  graves, 
and  whose  patrimony  has  been  stolen  to  gild  and  enrich  the  palaces  of 
rumsellers,  which  are  indeed  the  vestibules  of  hell. 

To  buy  decisions  of  law  in  its  favor,  hoping  to  pander  successfully  to 
he  corruption  of  the  courts  by  large  offers  of  gold. 

To  buy  long  and  learned  legal  sophistries  on  the  constitutional  rights 
of  men  to  demonize  themselves  and  scatter  “ firebrands,  arrows,  and 
death  ” abroad  through  all  the  land. 

To  buy  up  ignorant  and  unscrupulous  legislators,  aud  secure  their 
electon,  who  will  barter  away  the  dearest  rights  of  the  people  for  the 
gold  of  the  rumseller,  which  has  cost  the  blood  of  innocent  families. 

Yea,  to  buy  up  public  sentiment,  by’ generous  distribution  of  gifts,  ac- 
companied by  whining  sj'cophancy  and  mock  humility. 

It  has  formed  leagues,  large  and  numerous,  sworn  to- uphold  the 
usurped  and  unnatural  right,  to  disregard  entreaty  or  threat,  and  go  on 
in  its  thirst  for  blood  and  ruin. 

These  leagues  are  pledged,  assisted  by  diabolical  agencies,  not  only  to 
subvert  society  and  maintain  the  right  to  enter  every  family  circle  and 
tear  away  the  dearest  and  best,  but  to  overturn  and  subvert  the  very  Con- 
stitution of  our  State,  and  render  nuU  and  void  all  laws  that  have  been 
enacted,  or  shall  be  enacted  under  it,  for  the  regulation  and  suppressiid 
of  their  monopoly  of  mischief. 

They  would  rule  in  our  courts  as  well  as  in  our  prisons  and  alms, 
houses. 

They  would  fill  the  judiciary  as  well  as  the  graveyard  with  their  abet- 
tors and  victims,  offering  them  spoils. 

They  would  thus  secure  themselves  against  further  let  or  hindrsnse 
BTising  from  excise  regulations  or  the  enforced  restraints  of  moral  society. 

They  can  stand  the  melting  pleas  of  blasted  homes  and  broken 
hearts,  because  they  are  but  ’pleas— they  can  not  coerce  ; they  only  beg. 


AN  APPEAL. 


8 


They  can  quell  ’ these  cries,  or  so  harden  iheir  hearts  as  that  they 
ehall  be  as  the  sighing  of  the  wind  through  leafless  trees  mournful  but 
natural.  But  law  thei/  fear. 

Law  they  would  conciliate. 

They  would  gain  so  much  legal  place  and  political  power,  that  should 
they  not  be  able  to  buy  with  gold,  they  might  awe  into  silence,  and 
thereby  connivance,  by  terrible  threats. 

■Where  justice  cannot  be  bought,  they  hope  to  intimidate. 

"When,  by  these  plots  and  deep-laid  schemes,  these  leagues  fail  (as 
fail  they  must),  it  is  their  hope  to  divide  our  ranks — the  ranks  ot 
honest  men,  men  of  temperance  and  virtue — by  sowing  discords  and  cre- 
ating contentions  among  us. 

This  they  will  do  by  wresting  our  watchwords  against  us  ; by  slan- 
dering our  motives  ; by  attributing  to  us  political  aims  in  the  interest  of 
certain  parties,  or  a party. 

We  shall  be  called  the  decoys  or  the  stool-pigeons  of  one  party  or  the 
other  ; and  by  all  means  will  they  endeavor  to  provoke  us  to  forgetful- 
ness of  their  true  intent  and  our  true  aim. 

They  know  that,  politically,  we  sympathize  with  different  parties  as 
regarus  civil  and  governmental  questions. 

L'ul  let  us  teach  them  that,  while  thus  differing  as  to  civil  and 
political  affairs,  we  are  one  in  the  arena  of  domestic  peace  and  moral 
virtue.  We  are  one  for  the  triumph  of  Temperance  and  against  the  traf- 
fic of  Eum. 

We  can  know  no  party  here. 

Here  we  are,  brothers,  with  strong  arms  to  defend  and  resolute  wills  to 
persist  in  defending  our  homes  and  firesides  against  the  efforts  of  this 
gigantic  embodiment  of  wrong. 

Let  not  our  ranks  be  broken  by  such  devices  ; the  rather,  let  ns  close 
up  and  rally  every  scattering  force  to  meet  whatever  issue  our  enemies 
may  madly  thrust  upon  us. 

Fellow-citizens,  wo  entreat  you,  bo  not  deceived. 

It  is  known  unto  you  that  the  rum  interest  has  sought  to  identify 
itself,  in  turn,  with  all  parties  political  in  order  to  defeat  wise  meas- 
nres- 

It  has  endeavored  to  enlist  in  its  service  the  all-potent  press,  in  order 
to  defeat  justice  and  morality. 

It  has  made  overtures  to  the  judge  on  the  bench,  in  order  to  defeat  the 
right. 

It  will  now  raise  the  ringing  cry,  “Wolf!  Wo'fl  Politics!  Poli- 
nos ! ” and  brand  the  united  Temperance  societies  a "political  machine,” 
whose  movements  shall  bo  controlled  by  certain  leaders,  and  whose 


4 


AN  APPEAL. 


Bole  object  is  to  make  party  capital  for  the  approaching  electiona.  Ba 
not  deceived. 

"We  know  the  rum  traffic. 

Fellow-citizens,  you  also  know  this  traffic. 

It  stands  reaJy  to-day  to  buy  its  place  in  any  party,  for  the  sake  of  a 
new  lease  of  life. 

We  must  work  to  keep  it  out  of  aU  parties  ! 

Let  it  be  an  issue  by  itself  1 

We  must  separate  it  to  itself. 

We  must  compel  it  to  raise  its  black  flag  unaided  by  any  considerable 
political  power. 

Let  us  warn  aU  parties  of  our  denunciation  and  unyielding  opposi- 
tion, that  shall  for  a moment  grasp  the  bloody  hand  of  the  rum  traffic  in 
fraternity. 

Let  it  stand  alone  (or  run  for  office  alone),  a monument  of  evil,  a 
monument  of  murder,  of  suicide,  of  pauperism,  of  increased  taxation, 
of  prostitution,  of  treason  to  domestic  peace  and  public  weal,  of  all 
crimes. 

Let  it  stand  alone  in  the  midst  of  its  gilded  thoroughfares,  to  be 
despised  in  its  own  glare  by  all  political  and  social  complexions  ; to  bf 
hooted  and  despised  until,  out  off  from  all  sympathy,  it  shall  go  down  in 
eternal  night 

Let  us  withhold  our  suffrage,  without  regard  to  party  politics,  from 
any  man  who  solicits  our  confidence  and  vote,  if  he  is  the  friend  or  abet- 
tor of  the  rum  traffic. 

Let  him  be  the  murderer’s  candidate,  the  suicide’s  candidate,  th* 
rumseller’s  candidate  ; but  let  him  receive  our  execration  in  the  name  of 
the  hundreds  of  thousands  of  rum-blasted  homes  and  rum-bUghted 
hearts  in  our  broad  land. 

Fellow-citizens,  we  appeal  to  you. 

We  entreat  you  to  weigh  well  the  issues  raised,  and'  sustain,  by  your 
voices  and  your  ballots,  measures  and  men  that  look  toward  the 
maintenance  of  our  Constitution  and  the  execution  cf  the  laws,  espe- 
cially of  those  laws  which  are  intended  to  regulate  and  suppress  intem- 
perance. 

We  appeal  to  you  with  confidence. 

We  plead  humanity’s  cause  and  yours, 
pi  We  plead  for  your  children — their  lives,  their  property,  their  charao* 
ter,  their  eternal  future. 

We  plead  for  the  honest  son  of  toil — whose  path  is  beset  and  whocc 
•amings  are  filched  by  the  conscienceless  rumseller. 

And  we  plead  in  the  sacred  names  of  God  and  Government. 

POBiaSHTID  BY  THE  NATIONAL  TeMPEBANCE  SoCIETT  AND  PUBLICATION  HoUa% 

No.  58  Beade  Street,  two  doors  west  of  Bboadwax,  New 
. York,  at  $3  pee  Thousand.  i 


No.  52. 


THE  FRUITS  OF  LICENSE. 


BY  KEY.  WM.  THAYER. 


AS  a tree  is  known  by  its  fruits,  we  commend  to  the  advocates  of  14. 

cense  the  following  facts,  which  show  the  working  of  a License 
law  in  Massachusetts. 

Previous  to  the  November  election  of  1867,  the  State  constables  ea- 
forced  the  Prohibitory  Law  so  thoroughly  in  Boston,  that  the  tax  oa 
liquors  at  the  internal  revenue  district  No.  3,  including  most  of  the 
rum-selling  portion  of  the  city,  was  reduced  from  $22,000  per  month  to 
$6,000.  The  month  immediately  succeeding  the  election,  the  receipts  at 
the  same  office  on  liquors  advanced  again  to  nearly  $22,000,  showing 
tliat  a great  incubus  was  lifted  from  the  traffic  by  the  License  triumph. 

The  positive  testimony  of  over  250  towns  in  the  State  visited  since 
last  November  by  myself  or  some  of  the  agents  of  the  Alliance,  is  to 
the  very  marked  increase  of  intemperance.  Even  the  smaller  and  more 
retired  rural  districts  have  not  escaped  the  direful  consequences  o! 
“ free  rum.”  In  one  small  town,  situated  five  miles  from  the  nearest 
railroad  station,  on  a Saturday  night  just  previous  to  our  visit,  eleven 
intoxicated  men  were  counted  upon  the  principal  street.  The  oldest 
inhabitant  remembers  no  such  scene  of  intoxication  as  that. 

In  the  county  of  Suffolk,  on  the  1st  of  Sei)tember,  1867,  there  were 
less  than  900  places  w'here  liquor  w'as  sold,  and  most  of  these  clandes- 
tinely. On  the  first  day  of  September,  1868,  nearly  2,500  liquor  shops 
were  opened  on  the  same  territory,  a fact  which  proves  how  utterly 
false  was  the  plea  of  the  License  advocates,  that  their  object  was  M 
diminish  the  traffic. 

INFLUENCE  ON  TRADE. 

Everywhere,  employers  complain  of  idleness,  insubordination,  and 
Inefficiency,  occasioned  by  excessive  drinking.  We  doubt  if  there  be 
one  employer  in  the  State,  whose  workmen  number  twenty-five  or 
apward,  who  ■nill  not  testify  to  increased  troubles  with  his  men  through 
strong  drink.  Take,  for  example,  the  testimony  of  Oliver  Ames  & Son, 
one  of  the  largest  business  firms  in  New  England.  The  Messrs.  Ames 
write — “ We  have  over  400  men  in  our  worlis  here.  We  find  that  the 
present  License  Law  has  a very  bad  effect  among  our  employees.  We 
fnd  on  comparing  our  production  in  May  and  June  of  this  yea* 
(1868)  with  that  of  the  corresponding  months  of  last  3'ear  (1867),  that 
In  1867,  with  375,  we  produced  eight  (8)  per  cent,  more  goods  than  we 
ttd  in  the  same  months  in  186S  with  400  men.  We  attribute  this  large 


2 


THE  FRUITS  OF  LICENSE. 


felling  off  entirely  to  the  repeal  of  the  Prohibitory  Law  and  the  large 
oicrease  iu  the  use  of  intoxicating  diinks  among  our  men  in  conee* 
^[uence.” 

rUFLUESCE  ON  REFORMED  rNEBRIATES. 

llany  ol  .his  class  have  returned  to  their  cups  within  a few  montlia 
remperanc ) organizations  have  been  obliged  to  discipline  and  expel  s 
amt  h largv'  per  cent,  of  them  for  the  violation  of  the  pledge  than  the5 
did  under  •.■'rohibition.  Some  very  affecting  cases  have  come  to  ocT 
Rotice.  In  one  town,  the  son  of  an  intemperate  father  lost  his  life  in 
the  late  wm  After  his  death,  the  father  reformed,  and  continued 
faithful  to  n-s  pledge  until  the  increased  temptations  under  the  License 
movement  '’.arried  him  back  to  inebriety.  Three  or  four  months  since, 
a Boston  t rtist,  whose  business  is  to  produce  large  photographs  of 
deceased  soldiers  and  sell  them  to  relatives,  appeared  at  his  door  with 
a beautiiu'  likeness  of  the  slain  patriot  son.  Holding  it  up  to  the  gaze 
of  the  sir  cken  mother,  she  sprang  forward,  and  clasping  it  to  her 
bosom,  e/  vaim*  d,  “ Mr  son  ! my  son  !”  But  the  fall  of  her  wretched 
husbano  »vid  ro  need  her  to  such  poverty  that  she  could  not  purchase 
the  piciiv  a.  and  vith  a bleeding  heart  she  parted  with  it. 

TESTIMONY  OF  THE  PRESS. 

The  p-  ess,  am  >st  without  exception,  testifies  to  the  marked  increase 
of  intei/  oerance  under  the  License.  Even  License  sheets,  that  lent 
their  In  mence  'o  this  disastrous  change,  admit  it.  The  Springfield 
Repiibi^  in  says  • “ Intemperance  has  increased,  is  increasing,  and 
ouglu  ( • be  dim  nished.” 

The  name  pai^-u-  declares  that  the  jail  of  Hampden  County  it  otermn 
teith  pf  toners  in  consequence  of  the  large  increase  of  intemperance. 

Tue  Dress  ot  me  country  towns,  where  the  opportunit}’  to  judge  of 
the  or  loge  is  netter  than  in  the  city,  speaks  still  more  emphatically 
upon  t lis  subii'Ct.  For  example, — Beverly  was  one  of  the  best  Tem- 
pera ce  town.s  in  the  State  under  the  Prohibitory  Law;  scarcely  a 
pliM>!  could  be  found  where  liquor  was  sold  illegally,  and  the  streets 
we»  a as  quiet  at  night  as  by  day,  and  brawls  and  fights  very  infre- 
qu»ot  What  it  is  under  license,  the  following  extract  from  the 
Bo  'erly  Citian  shows : “ Since  the  new  law  went  into  operation,  as 
wr  »TC  lafor»»cd  by  the  police,  drunkenness  has  increased  alarmingij. 
Thoy  report  Uiat  a tveek  ago  last  Sunday  night,  in  one  room  of  r 
butiding,  in  'he  lower  part  of  the  town,  which  they  entered,  not  leee 
Ihan  fmrteer  persons  were  found  in  an  intoxicated  condition,  and  Ihs* 
H is  no  unc^umon  thing,  at  night,  for  men  to  be  found  lying  about  on 
ttie  ground  drunk.” 

PRISON  STATISTICS. 

The  ’U’n'her  of  commitments  to  the  State  Prison  during  the  yeai 
ttojptember  let,  1866,  before  the  Prohibitory  Law  was  strictly 


THE  PBTjrrS  OP  LICENSE. 


8 


enforced,  was  247 ; during  the  year  ending  September  1st,  1867,  where- 
in the  Law  was  entorced,  128 ; during  the  year  ending  September  Ist, 
1868,  under  License  Law,  180.  During  the  nine  (9)  months  of  1868  the 
Commitm«.'’*s  were  148,  while  in  the  corresponding  nine  months  oi 
1867  they  were  only  80. 

The  public  institutions  of  Suffolk  County  tell  the  same  storj'.  We 
called  for  the  statistics  of  the  Jail,  House  of  Correction,  and  Almshouse 
on  September  24th,  and  found  that  all  of  them  had  a large  increase  ol 
Inmates.  The  Almshouse  had  243  against  200  on  the  same  day  of  the 
month  in  1867  ; the  House  of  Correction  had  429  against  369  last  year; 
end  the  Jail  was  averaging  nearly  one  hundred  weekly  beyond  tha 
average  of  a year  ago. 

We  need  not  furnish  statistics  from  the  public  institutions  of  othex 
counties,  but  only  add  that  nearljr  all  of  them  bear  similar  testimony  ta 
the  increase  of  paupers  and  criminals. 

The  daily  arrests  for  drunkenness  in  Boston,  at  this  time,  are  largely 
in  excess  of  the  an-ests  last  year.  And  yet,  last  year,  the  inducement 
to  the  city  authorities  was  to  swell  the  number  of  arrests  under  Prohi- 
bition, which  the  city  did,  by  arresting  persons  who  were  but  partially 
disguised  with  liquor ; while  this  year,  the  inducement  is  to  lessen  the 
number  under  License.  Add  to  this  the  fact,  that,  since  the  repeal  of 
the  Prohibitory  Law,  drunken  men  can  not  be  arrested  without  a warrant, 
while  wnder  Prohibition  a police  officer  could  make  summary  arrests  even 
for  slight  intoxication,  and  the  following  figures  will  appear  remarkable. 

In  the  months  of  July,  August,  and  September  of  1867,  the  arrest* 
for  “ drunkenness,”  “ disturbing  the  peace,”  “ disorderly”  and  “ com- 
mon drunkards” — all  of  which  must  be  credited  to  rum — amounted  to 
2,369.  In  the  corresponding  months  of  this  year  (1868)  they  amount  to 
3,107.  Seven  hundked  and  TninTV-EiGnT  more  in  three  months  of 
this  year  than  there  were  in  the  corresponding  time  of  last  year  ! 

Another  item  deserves  mention  here.  In  making  appropriations  for 
the  public  institutions,  at  the  beginning  of  the  present  year,  the  city 
government  of  Boston  appropriated,  as  “ Estimated  for  Subsist- 
ence,” $5,000  more  than  last  year,  for  the  “ House  of  Correction,”  and 
(14  ,500  more  for  the  “ House  of  Industry,” — a fact  which  indicates 
that  the  authorities  anticipated  an  increase  of  rice  and  crime  under  thcil 
pet  License  Law. 

TESTIMONY  OF  CITY  mSSIONARIES. 

We  have  not  space  to  .quote  one  tithe  the  amount  of  testimony  froii 
this  source.  The  witness  borne  by  the  following  is  similar  to  wha 
has  been  testified  to  other  missionaries  in  this  and  other  cities  of  the 
Commonwealth,  and  is  the  testimony  of  men  whose  opportunities  fo* 
observation  are  greater  than  those  of  the  common  citizen.  Rev.  Philip 
Davis,  of  this  city,  says : “ When  I commenced  my  labors,  six  yean 
•go,  there  were  132  opeu  rum-ehops  in  Korth  Btreet;  but  when  the 


4 


THE  EBTJITS  op  LIGENS®. 


ProhiWtory  Law  was  enforced,  all  these  were  closed  except  tw«j 
which  were  hotels.  Since  the  repeal  of  the  Prohihitoiy  L:iw  I counted 
116  in  North  Street,  with  all  their  usual  accompaniments,  gambling 
and  houses  of  ill-fame.”  Another  writes : “ From  the  observations  1 
iSaily  make,  the  sale  and  use  of  intoxicating  drinks  among  us  at  tha 
present  time  is  greatly  in  excess  of  anything  I have  observed  under  tbs 
administration  of  the  Pi-ohibitory  Laio.  For  years  past  I have  sees 
aothing  that  compares  with  the  present  evils  of  intemperance.” 

» 

TESTIMONY  OF  PUELIC  REPORTS. 

In  the  last  annual, report  of  the  Inspectors  of  our  State  Prison,  tha 
Warden  says:  “ The  nuniber  of  convicts  at  the  prison  September  30, 
was  534,  their  average  age  being  about  26 ; the  oldest  is  63  years,  and 
the  youngest  16  years.  About  four  fifths  of  the  number  committed  the 
trimes  for  which  they  were  sentenced  either  directly  or  indirectly  by  the  use 
of  intoxicating  dnnks." 

The  Chaplain  sa3's:  “ Of  the  534  men  now  here,  the  greater  propor- 
tion would  be  glad  to  vote  for  the  Prohibitory  Law  ; for  manj'  of  them 
feel  that  their  safety  from  the  perils  of  drunkenness  depends,  in  a great 
degree,  on  such  a law.  They  realize  their  u'eakness  and  are  fearful  of 
themselves,  and  desire  such  a law  to  strengthen  them  in  their  resist- 
ance to  the  seduction  of  the  cup,  which  has  been  their  bane  and  curse. 
When  about  to  be  discharged,  to  go  out  again  into  the  world  to  combat 
its  varied  trials  and  temptations,  in  answer  to  the  hope  expressed  that 
they  will  do  well,  they  often  say,  ‘ I shall  do  well  enough  if  I let  liquor 
ilone.  If  I can  resist  when  urged  to  take  a drink,  or  can  go  to  some 
place  vhere  I can’t  get  it,  I shall  do  well  enough.  If  I come  back 
here,  H will  be  rum  tliat  brings  me.’  ” 

Om'  State  Board  of  Charities  say,  in  their  last  annual  report;  “ Of  all 
the  pFOximate  causes  or  occasion  of  crime,  none  is  so  fiaiitlul  as  intem- 
perance. The  returns  show  that  from  60  to  80  per  cent,  of  our  crim- 
mals  are  intemperate,  and  the  proportion  of  those  whose  crimes  were 
occasioned  by  intemperance  is  probably  even  greater.” 

The  last  report  of  the  Suffolk  Grand  Jury  shows  that  75  of  80  case* 
are  traced  to  intoxicating  drink  ; that  is,  fifteen  sixteenths  of  the  whole 
aumber  result  from  drinking  habits  1 

In  view  of  the  foregoing  facts,  it  must  be  conceded  that  license>\ 
llqucr  is  just  as  disastrous  now  as  it  was  when  King  Ahasuerus  and 
iis  s val  guests  had  a disgraceful,  drunken  time  at  a banquet,  though, 
-a  we  are  told,  “ the  drinking  was  according  to  the  law." 


ifiTTT'n  by  the  National  Xempekance  Society  and  F ctbIjIcatxos 
House,  No.  58  Ke.ade  Street,  two  doors  west  of  Beoadwat, 
New  Yobk,  at  $3  pee  Thousand. 


Ifo.  53. 


TME  BALLOT  FOR  TEMPERA.\CE. 


BY  EEV.  JAMES  B,  DUNN. 


* lARUNKENlSTESS,”  says  tlie  Westminster  Review,  “ is  the  curse  ai 

” England — a curse  so  great  that  it  far  eclipses  every  other  calami^ 
under  which  we  suffer.  It  is  impossible  to  exaggerate  the  evils  of 
drunkenness.” 

That  the  same  may  he  truly  said  of  America,  no  sane  person  can  foJ 
t moment  doubt.  The  evil  affects  every  family,  invades  eveiy  do- 
mestic hearth,  pervades  eveiy  social  circle,  looms  up  in  every  com- 
munity ; everywhere  it  stalks  abroad,  peopling  the  graveyards  with  its 
victims,  and  recruiting  the  armies  of  eternity  with  lost  souls.  By  night 
and  by  day  it  pursues  its  cruel  work  of  breaking  the  hearts  of  parents, 
blasting  the  hopes  of  children,  consigning  brothers  to  destruction  and 
Bisters  to  shame.  It  is  the  great  source  of  pauperism,  the  great  fount- 
ain of  crime ; fills  the  almshouses  and  peoples  the  jails,  and  is  fast 
Mapping  the  foundations  of  civil  and  social  government 

Against  this  evil,  for  nearly  half  a century,  earnest  men  have  waged 
an  incessant  warfare — their  weapons  being  chiefly  those  of  moral  and 
legal  suasion.  By  the  former  an  incalculable  amount  of  good  has  been 
done,  and  it  ought  to  be  wielded  vigorously  and  perseveringly 
Apart  from  the  many  it  has  reclaimed  and  saved,  even  from  the  midst 
of  deepest  ruin,  and  the  multitudes  it  has  prevented,  who  might  other- 
wise have  become  drunkards,  from  sharing  that  fate,  it  has  collected 
and  promulgated  facts,  inculcated  doctrines  which  have,  to  a great  ex- 
tent, weakened  or  changed  the  public  delusions  about  the  nature  and 
use  of  intoxicating  drinks,  and  wrought  a perfect  revolution  in  tho 
customs  and  habits  of  society.  But  the  tru'  h must  be  told  ; moral 
•uasion  has  its  limits.  It  will  neither  preserve  the  child  from  danger 
oor  the  vicious  from  crime.  It  is  too  feeble  to  combat  the  drunkard’a 
appetite  when  excited  by  temptation,  and  it  is  too  feeble  to  combat  the 
selfishness  by  which  unprincipled  men  are  actuated.  With  temptation 
tracking  the  steps  of  reformed  inebriates  on  every  hand,  facilities  pres*- 
ing  them  on  all  sides,  and  drinking  companions  ready  to  drag  them 
into  the  numerous  bar-rooms,  it  is  not  to  be  wondered  at  that  .so  many 
have  fallen  and  gone  back  to  their  cups.  If  these  weak  brethren  art 
to  be  delivered,  the  temptation  must  be  removed,  and  this  by  the  inters 
position  of  law. 


s 


THE  BAIXOT  FOR  TEMPEEANCK. 


But  it  must  not  be  thought  that  any  act  of  legislation  looking  to  thtt 
end  is  a substitute  for,  or  in  opposition  to,  total-abstinence  reform,  but 
its  true  and  necessarj'  concomitant  and  support.  So  long  as  man  ii 
weak  and  prone  to  temptation,  it  is  in  vain  to  preach  total  alrstincnoe 
witliout  we  at  the  same  time  practicallj-  enforce  by  law  the  precept  of 
fjie  Lord’s  Prayer,  “Lead  us  not  into  temptation,  i)ut  deliver  us  fiom 
S?il.’’  For  how  can  tlie  temptation  be  removed  sliort  of  the  .aw  i 
How  was  slavery,  or  the  corn-laws  proliibiled  in  England  ? W as  ii 
by  moral  suasion  alone,  or  by  sitting  idle  and  sa3'ing,  “ We  seek  th« 
entire  removal  of  the  traffic  in  human  flesli  and  the  tax  upon  human 
fcod,  by  laboring  to  induce  the  people  totally  to  abstain  from  buying 
ana  selling  tlieir  fellow-creatures  and  eating  class-taxed  bread  ?”  or 
was  it  by  invoking  Pailiament  to  restrict  or  regulate  bj'  law  the.se  ini- 
quities ? No ! It  was  only  when  Elizalteth  Ileriick,  in  England,  and 
the  Rev.  Andrew  Thomson,  in  Scotland,  against  .slaverj',  and  Cobden 
and  Bright  against  the  corn-laws,  aroused  the  people  to  demand  of 
Parliament,  as  tlieir  right,  that  these  iniquities  be  abolished,  that  Par- 
liament abolislied  them. 

Does  any  one  believe,  for  one  moment,  that,  with  the  exception  of 
the  slave-owners  and  tlie  land-ocvners,  if  all  the  people  of  the  British 
empire  had  been  morally  persuaded  of  the  iniquity  of  slaverj"  and  the 
corn-laws,  these  crying  wrongs  would  have  been  abolished  without  an 
act  of  Parliament — witliout  the  law’,  in  short?  Never!  no,  never!  II 
was  only  the  iron  liand  and  inexorable  grip  of  the  law’  that  either 
could  or  w’ould  have  forced  these  men  to  give  up  their  unhol}’  gains 
And  does  any  one  think,  for  a moment,  that  intemperance  and  iu> 
concomitant  evils  can  be  banished  from  the  land  by  moral  suasiveefforw 
only,  w’hile  an  iniquitous  fraternit}’  of  men  are  permitted  to  engage  in 
the  still  more  unholy  traffic  of  liquor-selling,  the  fruitful  and  only 
source  of  all  drunkenness  ? Never ! To  talk  of  persuading  such  men 
as  are  eveiy’where  to  be  found  engaged  in  liciuor-selliug  to  abandon 
the  traffic,  is  w’orse  than  foil}’.  As  long  as  money  can  be  made  by  the 
traffic,  there  are  men  who  would  build  their  groggery  in  tlie  crater  of 
a volcano ; they  would  sell  rum,  did  the  law  permit  them,  amid  the 
heaving  of  an  earthquake;  and  as  the  drunkard  steps  dow’ii  the  bank 
and  hangs  suspended  by  a single  twig  over  the  bottomless  pit,  they 
would  put  betw’een  his  chattering  teeth  the  draught  that  w’ould  un- 
nerve his  arai  and  plunge  him  into  an  eternal  abyss.  And  shall  wt 
IsUt  of  moral  suasion  to  such  men  ? Only  the  pains  and  penalties  of 
inw  will  make  them  feel  what  righteousness  and  trutli  can  not  makt 
them  see. 

Llow’,  then,  are  righteous  law’s  on  this  subject  to  be  secured,  an^ 
when  secured,  enh  reed?  Simply  by  the  election  of  men  ‘o  tlie  I-egin- 
lature  who  w’ill  sec  to  the  passage  of  such  laws,  and  of  officers  who 
will  see  that,  w hen  passed,  these  laws  are  enforced  ; and  that  such  men 


THE  BALLOT  FOB  TEMPEBAHCB.  S 

Biay  be  elected,  those  friends  whc  look  for  and  labor  for  the  removal 
of  the  great  curse  must  use  the  ballot. 

Too  long  have  the  friends  of  Temperance,  by  their  inconsistency  ^n 
this  matter,  given  the  world  cause  to  doubt  the  sincerity  of  tlieir  pro- 
fessions. “ Where  is  your  consistency,”  it  is  asked,  “ when,  after  aD 
you  say  about  the  evils  of  intetnperance  and  your  desire  for  thfeir  ro- 
sio'.al,  you  yet  vote  men  into  the  Legislatnre,  Congress,  and  othsg- 
BlUces,  whom  you  knew  to  be  in  the  liabit  of  using  every  day,  aa  a 
beverage,  drinks  that  intoxicate,  and  who  have  no  sympathy  with  the 
Temperance  reform  ?”  Can  we  expect  success  when  so  inconsistent 
with  our  professions? 

The  power  of  the  ballot  to  the  accomplishment  of  any  object  in 
politics  is  understood  and  appreciated  by  the  liquor-dealers.  In  all 
questions  affecting  their  interests,  they  act  in  concert  and  as  one  man — 
pledged  to  support  no  candidute  for  office  who  can  not  give  satisfactory 
assurance  that  he  is  wuth  them,  and  in  all  things  will  act  for  them. 
Their  motto  is,  “ He  that  is  not  for  us  is  against  us.”  To  this,  their  un- 
flinching devotion  to  the  interests  of  their  own  craft,  must  be  attributed 
much  of  their  success  and  present  power. 

Never,  for  one  moment,  do  they  hesitate  to  put  to  the  candidate 
seeking  their  suffrage  the  question.  Are  you  in  favor  of  legislation  in 
our  interest  and  in  opposition  to  all  Temperance  movements  ? 

Why  should  the  friends  of  Temperance  neglect  the  use  of  the  ballot 
in  seeking  the  removal  of  the  greatest  evil  that  afflicts  the  country  ? 

We  speak  not  now  of  the  formation  of  a new  party  ; we  simply  ask, 
Is  it  consistent  for  us  to  pledge  with  the  one  hand  our  lives  to  labor  foi 
the  suppression  of  intemperance,  while  with  the  other  we  deposit  oui 
ballot  for  a man  who  is  in  favor  of  its  continuance  ? Let  every  friend 
of  Temperance  take  the  ground,  and  let  nominating  conventions  of 
both  parties  understand  that  no  candidate  for  any  office  can  receive  his 
vote  who  is  not  in  favor  of  the  speedy  and  complete  overthrow  of  the 
liquor  traffic,  the  grand  feeder  of  intemperance,  and  half  the  work  is 
done. 

And  why  should  it  be  otherwise  ? How  can  I,  as  a friend  of  Tem- 
perance, consistently  vote  for  any  man  to  any  office  who  is  not  with 
me  in  seeking  the  removal  of  the  great  curse?  If  a man  comes  to  me 
for  my  vote,  is  it  that  he  should  represent  Jiiinself  or  me  ? If  he  does 
not  agree  witJ,  what  I believe  to  be  my  interest  and  my  duty  how  casf 
iie  repi'f'scnt  me  ? If,  then,  I would  consistently  carry  out  my  'l  em- 
perance  principles,  I must  use  the  ballot  in  its  behalf. 

While,  then,  we  would,  as  friends  of  Temperance,  seek,  and  that 
most  energetically,  by  the  use  of  the  pledge,  the  press,  the  pulpit,  the 
forum,  and  the  school-house,  the  advancement  of  Temperance  in  the 
reclamation  of  the  inebriate,  the  preservation  of  the  youth,  and  the 
creation  of  a healthy  public  sentiment  on  that  subject,  let  us  use  also 


4 


THK  BALLOT  FOB  TEMPKEASCK. 


Ike  (Mllot.  Our  petitions  to  legislators  for  the  enactment  of  just  lawi 
»n  this  subject  will  be  treated  with  contemptuous  silence  so  long  u 
the  signei-s  neglect  to  this  end  that  share  in  the  sovereignty  of  the  State 
which  is  the  privilege  and  duty  of  every  citizen — the  right  of  suffrage. 

True,  indeed,  when  Temperance  men  talk  of  using  the  ballot  in  ac- 
cordance with  their  principles,  to  elect  men  favorable  to  Temperance 
s*d  opposed  to  the  liquor  traffic,  politicians  raise  the  cry,  “ Oh  1 that 
will  endanger  our  party;”  for  they  well  know  that,  as  long  as  party 
leaders  care  more  for  what  is  expedient  than  what  is  right,  the  con- 
riatent  use  of  the  ballot  by  Temperance  men  to  advance  that  reform 
will  certainly  upheave  political  organizations,  swamp  partisans,  and 
thwart  the  designs  of  cemagogues.  But  what,  then,  if  organizations  are 
so  weak  that  they  can  not  stand  up  for  the  right,  for  the  interests  of 
humanity,  and  the  promotion  of  the  greatest  good  ever  tendered  to 
man  ? Then  let  them  go  down.  If  such  candidates  only  can  be  elected 
who  are  in  sympathy  with  a traffic  that  has  proved  itself  to  be  an  un- 
mitigated evil,  in  favor  of  which  not  one  honest  word  can  be  said,  then 
let  them  be  elected  by  the  votes  of  those  of  like  mind. 

But  it  is  not  so.  Let  candidates  for  office  understand  that  the  suf- 
ilages  of  all  Temperance  men,  without  regard  to  party  politics,  will  be 
withheld  from  every  man  who  solicits  their  confidence  and  votes,  if  he 
is  the  friend  or  abettor  of  the  rum  traffic,  and  that  only  such  who  are  in 
B3'mpathy  with,  and  will  use  their  official  influence  toward,  the  sup- 
pression of  that  traffic,  can  receive  the  ballots  of  Temperance  men,  and 
very  soon  the  course  of  things  will  be  changed.  And  office-holders  as 
well  as  office-seekers,  learning  wdsdom,  will  see  that  laws  tending  to 
tlie  eradication  of  the  evil  are  placed  on  the  statute-book,  and,  whan 
placed  there,  are  enforced  with  a vigor  and  persistenc}'  that  shall  be  a 
terror  to  evil-doers  and  a praise  to  them  that  do  well. 

Friends  of  Temperance,  as  j'e  love  consistency,  the  welfare  of  hu- 
manity, your  country  and  j’our  God,  let  the  cry  go  forth : The  Ballo* 
rf>H  Texeperance. 


Polished  by  the  National  Temeebance  Socxety  axd  Publica; 
Bones,  No  68  Heade  Street,  two  doobs  west  op  Bboadwax, 
New  Yobb,  at  $3  feb  Thousand. 


No.  65. 

NATURAL  AND  RESERVED  RIGHTS. 

BY  KEY.  JOSEPH  CUMMINGS,  D.D, 


Those  opposed  to  the  prohibition  by  law  of  the  sale  of  intoxicatiag 
irinks  as  a bevsrage  have  often  urged  with  great  confidence  and 
fwsitiveness  that  such  legislation  is  a violation  of  the  natural  and  re- 
served  rights  of  men  as  members  of  society.  Their  theory  of  government 
— which  is  by  far  too  prevalent — is  based  on  what  is  called  the  Social 
Compact, and  recognizes  no  higher  origin  of  civil  government  than  thecon- 
nent  of  the  governed.  It  supposes  the  natural  state  of  man  to  be  that  of 
Independent  individuals.  Becoming  weary  of  their  savage  warfare,  they 
met  for  consultation,  and  agreed  to  give  up  certain  rights  to  government, 
the  agent  of  society,  in  order  better  to  secure  others.  All  rights  not 
conceded  remain  with  the  individual.  Many  seem  to  beiieve  that 
among  the  most  important  of  their  reserved  rights  was  the  right  tc  use 
and  traffic  in  intoxicating  drinks  We  can  not  here  stop  fully  to  dis- 
cuss this  theory,  which  we  regard  as  essentially  wrong,  and  contrary  to 
the  dictates  of  reason  and  conscience.  Historically,  its  account  of  the 
origin  of  government,  and  the  implied  absolute  and  general  consent  to  it, 
are  without  foundation.  Man  is  born  into  society,  and  made  subject  to 
its  restraints  irrespective  of  his  will.  Moreover,  individuals  can  not 
confer  a right  they  do  not  possess.  He  who  has  committed  murder  de- 
serves death ; but  he  has  no  right  to  take  his  own  fife,  and  of  course 
can  not  confer  such  a right  on  others. 

No  moralist  will  admit  that  a thousand  men  may  remove  to  an  unin- 
habited, unclaimed  island, and  rightfully  establish  a government  that  shall 
recognize  as  proper  falsehood,  theft,  sensuality,  and  murder.  There 
Is  a higher  authority  than  human  law,  that  forbids  it  to  vary  from  the 
immutable  distinctions  of  right  and  wrong.  The  office  of  law,  as  a rule 
ef  government,  is  to  enjoin,  under  the  fear  of  penalties,  the  perform- 
ance of  what  is  right  and  the  abstaining  from  what  is  wrong. 

The  true  theory  of  government,  as  we  regard  it,  removes  all  difficul- 
ties alleged  to  be  in  the  way  of  legislation  relative  to  intemperance.  !i 
represents  the  natural  state  of  man,  the  state  for  which  he  was  create4! 
ind  designed,  as  in  society,  not  as  that  of  independent  individuals. 
God  designed  man  to  be  a member  of  society,  and  from  it  he  has  n® 
fight  to  separate  himself.  Man  surrenders  no  rights  On  becoming  a 
fnembei  of  society,  for  he  has  none  to  surrender.  He  never  had  a 
right  to  do  any  thing  against  its  welfare.  Asa  created,  accountable  be- 
ing, all  his  rights,  from  the  necessity  of  the  case,  are  derived.  Society, 
and  its  agent,  government,  are  divine  institutions,  essential  to  the  per* 


t 


NATURAL  AND  RESERVED  RIGHTS. 


fection  of  the  race.  Hence,  God,  who  gives  all  rights,  never  conferred 
any  right  to  destroy  or  injure  them. 

There  is  a common  and  pernicious  error  relating  to  natural  ri^hti 
that  has  the  sanction  of  eminent  friends  of  temperance.  It  is  said  % 
man  has  a right  to  do  as  he  pleases,  if  he  does  not  interfere  with  tha 
welfare  of  society.  As  an  illustration,  it  is  by  them  admitted  that,  in 
the  privacy  of  his  chamber,  a man  may,  if  he  pleases,  drink  and  b« 
drunken;  a man  has  a right  to  waste  and  destroy  his  property  oi 
health.  By  the  doctrine  we  advocate,  which  is  founded  on  the  simplest 
principles  that  recognize  the  dependence  and  responsibility  of  man,  it 
is  evident  that  no  man,  at  any  time  or  in  any  place,  public  or  private, 
or  under  any  circumstances,  actual  or  possible,  has,  in  any  real,  true 
sense  of  the  word,  a right  to  sin  or  do  any  thing  God  prohibits.  It  is 
ft  sentiment  infidel  in  its  origin  and  tendencies  that  claims  the  source 
of  right  is  in  the  general  consent  of  men.  Is  it  not  absurd  to  suppose 
this  consent  can  make  that  right  which  God  forbids  ? It  is  a great  mis- 
take  to  concede  to  the  individual  the  right  to  do  what  society,  as  such, 
has  no  right  to  prohibit.  Man  has  power  to  sin,  but  no  right;  he  has 
power  to  steal,  but  no'  right ; he  has  power  to  commit  murder,  but  no 
right;  he  has  power  to  mislead  others  by  evil  example,  but  no  right; 
he  has  power  to  debase  his  physical,  intellectual,  and  moral  faculties  by 
intemperance,  but  no  right. 

It  may  be  difficult,  in  many  cases,  to  determine  the  province  of  civil 
law,  which  evidently  is  not  coextensive  with  individual  obligation.  It 
is  every  man’s  duty  to  pray  in  secret ; but  law  may  not  determine  the 
frequency,  the  place,  or  the  hour.  It  is  a duty  to  love  God,  to  believe 
in  Christ,  to  repent  of  sin ; but  civil  law,  that  can  not  control  the  affec- 
tions or  determine  whether  the  duties  are  performed  or  not,  may  not 
by  its  penalties  enforce  these  or  other  duties  of  spiritual  religion.  But 
no  one  can  reasonably  deny  that  law  may,  in  many  cases,  prohibit  a vio- 
lation of  many  of  God’s  commandments.  The  great  principle  of  legis- 
lation is  to  prohibit  all  that  is  against  the  general  welfare.  Civil  govern- 
ment is  a distinct  feature  of  God’s  moral  administration  ; and  all  its  pow- 
er, as  well  as  right,  is  ultimately  derived  from  him.  Magistrates  are  hia 
messengers  for  good,  and  the  province  of  law,  which  should  be  the  ex- 
pression of  his  will,  extends  to  all  things  injurious  to  society,  corrupt- 
ing to  its  morals,  or  increasing  its  burdens  without  bringing  correspond- 
ing benefits. 

The  only  question  to  be  considered,  when  it  is  proposed  to  prehibit 
by  law  the  sale  of  intoxicating  drinks  as  a beverage,  is,  whether  such 
Bale  is  an  evil.  On  this  point  we  deem  no  argument  is  here  needed.  No 
man  in  sincerity  can  ask  God’s  blessing  on  this  traffic,  and  call  him  U 


NATCrBAL  AND  BBSEBVBD  BIGHTS.  9 

witness  that  he  follows  it  because  he  believes  that,  directly  or  indirectly. 
It  promotes  the  health,  wealth,  happiness,  and  spiritual  welfare  and  god- 
iiness  of  the  community.  There  is  no  peculiarity  in  temperance  legisla- 
tion, and  there  is  no  principle  involved  in  a righteous  government  that 
does  not  demand  the  prohibition  of  the  trafiBc.  The  objections  against 
this  legislation  have  the  same  force  against  all  law.  It  is  vain  to  say  it 
jdoes  not  reform  men,  that  it  is  in  advance  of  public  opinion,  that  it  is 
not  and  can  not  be  enforced.  Law  as  directly  reforms  intemperate  men 
and  the  dealers  in  intoxicating  drink  as  it  does  thieves  and  murderers. 
Its  great  office,  in  all  its  applications,  is  not  so  much  to  reform  criminals 
as  to  prevent  crime.  It  is  the  fear  of  penalties  threatened,  rather  than 
punishment  endured,  that  deters  from  transgression. 

Good  laws  have  been  in  advance  of  the  opinions  and  wishes  of  the 
majority  of  men  ever  since  God,  amid  thunderings  and  flame,  gave  hia 
law  on  trembling  Mount  Sinai.  Did  he  make  a mistake  ? His  laws,  as 
well  as  many  of  the  best  laws  of  society,  have  not  been  obeyed  ; 
should  they,  therefore,  be  repealed  ? Shall  there  be  no  regulating 
human  conduct  offensive  to  those  whose  appetites  and  evil  desires  lead 
to  its  violation  ? Law  is  a teacher,  and  one  of  the  best  helps  in  forming 
a right  public  opinion. 

The  assertion  that  a temperance  law  can  not  be  enforced  is  a mistake. 
Such  laws  have  been  enforced.  And  if  but  half  the  determination  that 
was  manifested  in  behalf  of  the  Fugitive  Slave  Law  should  be  shown, 
there  would  not  be  a village  in  all  New-England  in  which  a stringent 
temperance  law  would  not  be  obeyed.  Government  is  energetic  in  com- 
pelling obedience  to  other  laws,  protecting  property  and  life.  It  will 
crush  opposition,  even  if  the  fields  shall  be  covered  with  the  slain  and 
the  streets  should  run  with  blood.  If  it  would  do  all  this  to  prevent 
the  destruction  of  property,  shall  it  not  enforce  laws  that  will  prevent 
not  only  the  loss  of  property,  but  the  destruction  of  the  lives  and  souls 
of  men  ? 

As  already  stated,  legislation  on  temperance  has  nothing  in  it  peculiar. 
Other  laws  limit  the  control  of  property  and  the  modes  of  human 
actions.  Law  forbids  the  sale  of  bad  books  and  of  lottery  tickets,  even 
when  the  parties  immediately  interested  are  willing.  In  many  places, 
where  public  safety  requires,  it  limits  the  kind  of  materials  for  buildings, 
end  their  height.  A man  may  not  dam  up  a stream  of  water  on  his  own 
land,  when  the  health  of  the  neighborhood  will  in  consequence  suffer 
When  land  is  needed  for  highways  and  railroad'^,  it  is  taken,  even  with 
out  the  consent  of  the  owner.  To  him  it  may  have  special  value  bt 
cause  of  peculiar  associations.  In  it  may  be  the  graves  of  his  ancei  - 
tors  and  of  his  children ; but  the  plot  he  has  jealously  guarded  froio 


4 


NATUBAJL  AND  EE8KBVED  EIGHTS. 


the  public  gaze  is  thrown  open  to  the  noise,  bustle,  and  crowds  of  com- 
merce. He  is  not  allowed  to  determine  the  value  of  his  property,  but 
even  this  is  decided  by  others. 

Admitting  intemperance  is  an  evil,  a curse  to  society,  every  principle 
tsnderlying  all  righteous  legislation  demands  that  it  shall  be  suppressed 
by  law.  It  was  a wise  law  enacted  by  the  Plymouth  colony;  “All  uiis- 
iemeanors  of  any  person  or  persons,  as  tend  to  the  hurt  and  detriment 
»f  society,  civility,  peace,  and  heighborhood.s,  shall  be  inquired  into  by 
the  grand  inquest,  and  the  persons  presented  to  the  court,  that  so  the 
disturbers  thereof  may  be  punished,  and  the  peace  and  welfare  of  the 
subject  comfortably  preserved.”  Can  there  be  any  doubt  that  the  sale  of 
intoxicating  drinks  as  a beverage  tends  to  the  hurt  and  detriment  of 
society  ? 

In  order  to  secure  right  legislation,  the  temperance  question  should  be 
introduced  into  politics,  and  should  be  regarded  as  of  primary  impor- 
tance.  Temperance  men  have  too  often  been  wanting  in  vigor  and  de- 
cision. Hitherto  they  have  been  timid  and  vacillating,  and  too  often 
have  yielded  to  compromises  that  have  shown  their  weakness.  They 
have  not  insisted  that  their  principles  should  be  introduced  into  a party 
platform,  lest  some  other  great  cause,  like  the  preservation  of  the  nations’ 
life,  should  be  injured.  Every  good  cause  is  safe  with  temperance  men, 
who  have  ever  been  loyal  and  devoted  to  the  best  interests  of  the  coun- 
try. If  they  had  shown  the  decision  and  consecration  to  their  work 
that  characterized  the  anti-slavery  men,  long  since  they  would  have  glo- 
riously triumphed. 

Temperance  legislation  is  necessary  to  redeem  the  country  from  the 
reproach  of  having  proved,  what  its  enemies  allege,  that  a republican 
government  is  a failure.  Manifestly  it  is  thus,  as  it  is  seen  in  our  large 
cities,  such  as  New-York,  Boston,  and  others.  The  multitude  and  their 
corrupt  leaders  that  support  fraud,  corruption,  bribery,  peijury,  and  all 
manner  of  crimes,  are  opposed  to  temperance.  Corrupt,  unprincipled 
leaders  would  lose  all  their  power  if  the  sale  of  intoxicating  liquors 
should  be  prohibited.  This  reproach  and  disgrace  to  our  government 
are  found  only  where  intemperance  prevails. 

The  large  and  influential  body  of  temperance  men  has  suflficient 
wealth,  intelligence,  and  power  to  sustain  their  cause.  All  that  is  need 
ed  is  union  in  a firm  determination  that  they  will  sustain  each  other 
and  give  their  support  to  no  party  or  measure  that  is  opposed  to  th 
good  of  man  and  the  will  of  God. 

Published  bv  the  National  'L’eatpeeance  Soctett  and  Pcblicatio* 
House,  No.  58  Keade  Steeet,  two  dooks  west  of  Beoadwat, 

New  Yoek,  at  33  pee  Thousand. 


No.  69 


Ems  OF  LICENSE. 

BY  REV.  WM.  M.  THAYER. 


Tbtb  License  Law  of  Msissacliusetts  has  worked  great  misckief  i,lirotigh< 
aat  trie  State.  All  official  reports  and  documents  relating  to  the  subjeci 
ieaounoa  it  as  the  cause  of  the  large  increase  of  vice  and  crime  in  the 
Commonwealth  in  1868.  Extracts  from  official  documents  are  fm'uished 
to  this  tract  to  confirm  our  statement.  In  his  inaugural  address  (Jan- 
uary, 1869)  Governor  Claflin  said : 

“ A moral  and  Christian  people  cannot  remain  inactive  when  they  sea 
auch  results  as  are  following,  and  are  sure  to  follow,  the  sale  of  intoxicat- 
ing drinks  to  the  extent  that  now  prevails  in  our  hitherto  quiet  and  or 
derly  State.  The  increase  of  drunkenness  and  crime  during  the  last  six 
months,  as  compared  with  the  same  period  in  1867,  is  very  marked  and 
decisive  as  to  the  operation  of  the  law.  The  State  prison,  jails,  and  houses 
of  correction  are  being  rapidly  filled,  and  mil  soon  require  enlarged  ac- 
commodations if  the  commitments  continue  to  increase  as  they  have  since 
the  present  law  went  into  force.  The  increase  of  commitments  for  the 
eight  months  previous  to  the  1st  of  October,  1868,  over  the  same  time  in 
1867,  is  remarkable,  and  demands  the  careful  attention  of  the  community. 
In  the  eight  months  alluded  to,  in  1867,  65  persons  were  committed  to 
the  State  prison ; in  the  same  period  in  1868,  there  were  136  commit- 
ments— more  than  double  the  number  of  the  previous  year.  It  may  he, 
perhaps,  that  all  this  increase  is  not  due  to  the  ease  and  freedom  with 
which  intoxicating  liquors  can  he  obtained,  but  few  will  deny  that  much 
the  largest  part  is  chargeable  to  this  cause.” 

The  Chief  Constable  of  the  Commonwealth  reported  to  the  Legislature 
(January,  1869) : 

“ This  law  has  opened  and  legalized,  in  the  various  cities  and  towns, 
about  two  thousand  five  hundred  open  bars,  and  over  cue  thousand  other 
places  where  liquors  are  presumed  not  to  be  sold  by  tne  glass.  Of  these 
three  thousand  five  hundred  liquor  establishments,  Boston  has  about  two 
thousand,  or  about  five  hundred  more  than  all  the  other  cities  and  towna 
of  the  Commonwealth.  Drunkenness  is  on  the  increase  to  a melancholy 
extent.  The  official  report  ot  the  Chief  of  the  Boston  Police  shows  the 
following  results  for  a period  only  three  months,  ending  October  1,  viz. 


For  the  Quarter  ending  OcTOsaa  1,  1867. 

Cases  of  drunkenness  arrested  by  the  police  . . . . 1,728 

Common  drunkards  ...  ....  . 148 

Disorderly  conduct  . . 300 

Dirturbing  the  peace ...  257 

Aiftaults ...  433 

Intoxicated  persons  helped  home  , , . 479 


. 3,34f 


Total 


2 


EVILS  OF  LICENSE. 


Foe  the  Quakter  ending  October  1,  1868. 


Cases  of  druukenness  arrested  by  the  police  . l,Dl& 

Common  drunkards 1^4 

Disorderly  conduct  . . . , 653 

Disturbing  the  peace  . , 397 

Assaults . « ■ 547 

Intoxicated  persons  helped  home  484 

Total  . - . 4,l;S 

3,344 


Increase  in  1868,  for  one  quarter  ...  . . 794 


"The  above  described  offences  are  always  recognized  by  police  courts 
and  the  records  of  police  stations  as  cases  of  drunkenness.  Surely  if  this 
Increase  of  drunkenness  and  its  immediate  and  well-known  results  are 
admitted,  can  the  proposition  that  a License  Law  would  promote  tempe- 
rance and  tlie  moderate  use  of  intoxicating  liquors  be  longer  maintained 
or  safely  suggested?  The  rapid  increase  of  crime  and  violence  during 
the  past  year  over  former  years  is  without  precedent  in  the  history  of 
criminal  experience.  The  State  prison  and  houses  of  correction  neve; 
held  within  their  limits  such  numbers  as  at  the  present  time,  while  tlie 
wheels  of  justice  are  almost  clogged  with  the  trial  of  constantly  accumc 
lating  criminal  business,  and  the  district  attorneys  of  Suffolk  find  it 
almost  impossible  to  clear  their  criminal  dockets  from  month  to  month, 
notwithstanding  the  courts  in  this  county  are  in  almost  perpetual  session. 
Is 't  unfair  to  suggest  that  the  open  bar  and  inviting  sale  of  intoxicating 
liquors,  licensed  and  unlicensed,  in  every  street,  is  to  a considi^i-wiibi 
extent  chargeable  and  responsible  for  tliis  state  of  things?” 

The  Board  of  State  Charities  say  (Fifth  Report,  pp.  36-40) : 

“ While  in  our  cities  there  is  an  undeniable  increase  in  intoxication 
and  consequent  crime,  the  change  is  more  noticeable  in  the  smaller 
towns,  and  the  effect  in  general  is  so  palpable  that  public  opinion  seems 
already  frowning  upon  the  unseemly  order  of  things,  and  demanding  a 
return  to  the  safer  regime  of  prohibition,  with  reasonable  penalties  and  a 
faithful  attempt  to  execute  the  law.  Poverty’  and  vice  are  what  the  poor 
man  buys  with  his  poisoned  liquor ; sickness,  beastliness,  laziness,  and 
pollution  are  what  the  State  gives  in  exchange  for  the  license-money 
which  the  dram-seller  filches  from  the  lean  purse  of  the  day -laborer  and 
the  half-grown  lad,  and  hands  over,  sullied  with  shame,  to  the  high-sala- 
ried official  who  receives  it.  But  the  treasury  reaps  little  from  this  re- 
volting tribute  ; for  along  with  the  licensed  shops  and  bars  twice  as  many 
that  are  unlicensed  ply  their  trade,  and  debauch  the  poor  without  enrich- 
ing any'body  but  the  dram -seller.  These  are  the  practical  results  of  a 
license  system  in  Massachusetts.  The  increase  of  intemperance,  which 
the  reaction  of  last  year  against  the  strictness  of  prohibition  has  greatly 
promoted,  interferes  at  once  with  our  industrial  interests,  fosters  pauper- 
iem  and  disease,  and  swelis  the  list  of  criminals.  That  intemperance  has 
increased  will  appear  from  the  prison  statistics,  soon  to  be  submitted ; 
that  Clime  and  vice  h-ave  also  increased  will  be  shown  by'  the  same  impar- 
tial test,  as  well  as  confirmed  by  the  observation  of  a.l  who  have  attended 
to  that  subject,  and  noticed  wl  at  has  been  going  on  in  the  past  year.  If 
It  is  desired  to  secure  in  the  best  manner  the  repre8.sion  of  crime  and 
pau^ierism,  the  increase  of  production,  the  decrease  of  taxation  and  a g^'-Q 


EVILS  OP  LICENSE. 


3 


•nJ  prosperity  of  the  community,  so  far  as  this  question  of  inteniperanca 
is  concerned,  it  is  clearly  niy  judgment  that  Massaclmsei  ts  should  return 
to  the  policy  which  prohibits  the  sale  of  intoxicating-  drinks  except  foi 
mechanical  or  medical  purposes. 

“ It  will  be  remembered  that  the  election  of  November,  1867,  virtually 
abolished  the  prohibitory  law,  though  it  remained  nominally  in  force 
until  April  23,  1868.  Bearing  these  facts  in  mind,  and  noticing  the  cor- 
responding decrease  in  prosecutions  for  violating  the  liqufu-  laws,  you 
will  also  notice  the  increase  of  public  drunkenness,  such  as  is  punished 
by  imprisonment  when  the  fine  imposed  cannot  at  once  be  ]iaid.  For  tha 
eix  months  ending  April  1,  1867,  the  number  committed  to  jail  for  drunk- 
euness  was  884  : for  violating  the  liquor  law,  107.  In  the  corresponding 
aix  months  beginning  October  1, 1867,  and  ending  April  1, 1868,  the  num- 
ber of  commitments  for  drunkenness  was  1,03d  ; for  violation  of  the 
liquor  law,  47.  In  houses  of  correction  during  the  first-named  period, 
480  commitments  for  drunkenness,  and  58  for  violating  the  law ; in  the 
second  period,  688  and  24 ; in  the  Boston  House  of  Industry,  752  commit- 
ments for  drunkenness  in  the  first  period,  and  853  in  the  second.  In  the 
whole  State  during  the  first  period  there  were  2,116  commitments  for 
drunkenness,  and  165  for  violating  the  liquor  laws  ; in  the  second  period, 
there  were  2,576  commitments  for  drunkenness,  and  only  70  for  violation 
of  the  liquor  laws.  The  whole  number  of  commitments  for  all  oifences 
was  5,977  in  the  first  period,  and  6,428  in  the  second.  If  we  now  compare 
the  last  six  months  of  the  prison  year  1867  (from  April  1 to  October  1) 
with  the  last  six  months  of  1868,  the  figures  are  equally  suggestive.  In 
the  jails  during  this  period,  in  1867,  there  were  988  commitments  for 
drunkenness  ; in  the  houses  of  correction,  609  ; in  the  House  of  Industry. 
904;  total,  2,501.  During  the  corresponding  period  in  1868  the  number 
of  commitments  was — to  the  jails,  1,090;  to  the  houses  of  correction, 
1,020;  to  the  House  of  Industry,  1,060 — total,  3,170  : the  whole  number 
of  commitments  for  all  offences  being  0,303  in  this  period  of  1867,  and 
7,098  in  1868.  During  the  year  past,  therefore,  it  appears  that  while 
crime  in  general  has  only  increased  about  10  per  cent.,  drunkenness  has 
increased  more  than  twice  as  much,  or  24  per  cent.  This  fact  offers  the 
best  possible  comment  on  the  condition  of  the  public  mind  and  of  the 
legal  repression  of  intemperance  since  the  State  election  of  1867.” 

On  page  175  the  Board  of  Charities  add : 

“ The  prison  registers  indicate  that  more  than  two-thirds  of  the  crimi- 
nals in  the  State  are  the  victims  of  intemperance ; but  the  proportion  o? 
crime  traceable  to  this  great  vice  must  be  set  down,  as  heretofore,  at  not 
less  than  four-fifths.  Its  effects  are  unusually  apparent  in  almost  every 
grade  of  crime.  A noticeable  illustration  appears  in  the  number  of  com- 
mitments to  the  State  Prison,  which,  during  eiglit  months  of  the  preaenl 
year,  in  which  the  sale  of  intoxicating  liquors  has  been  almost  wholly 
nnrestrained,  was  136,  against  65  during  the  corresponding  months  of  the 
preceding  year.  Similar  results  appear  in  nearly  all  the  prisons  of  the 
Chmmonwealth.” 

The  words  of  the  Board  of  Charities  are  rendered  more  emphatig 
Jrem  the  fact  that  only  one  member  of  the  Board  is  identified  -with  the 
temperance  cause. 

The  Inspectors  of  the  State  Prison  reported  to  the  Legislature  (Juaq 
1869  aa  follows  [the.  report  has  been  referred  to] ; 


i 


EVILS  OF  LICSNSB. 


“The  general  fact  is  undeniable  that  a very  large  projxjrtioa  ol 
offences  against  law  which  bring  men  to  prison  for  punishment  are  com- 
nutted  thrjugh  the  agency  of  intoxicating  liquors,  and  that  their  in- 
ci  eased  public  sale  adds  to  the  number  of  crimes  committed  and  the  num 
ber  of  persons  convicted.  We  are  not  called  upon  to  discuss  this  matter 
eeparate  from  our  observation  as  supervisors  of  the  prison,  and  therefor* 
simply  call  attention  to  the  fact  of  the  increased  number  of  commitments 
SCade  during  eight  mouths  of  the  present  year,  when  the  sale  of  spiri- 
tuous liquors  has  been  almost  wholly  unrestrained,  over  those  of  the 
*mo  time  in  the  preceding  year,  when  the  public  sale  was  prohilited 
and,  to  a great  extent,  stopped. 


CojniiTMENTS  m 1867. 

February  . .15 

March ....  13 

April ...  4 

May 

June 

July '.6 

August 3 

September .6 

Total 66 

Commitments  in  1868. 

February 80 

March  ....  19 

April 16 

May 17 

J une  .............  15 

July  .............  17 

August 11 

September  ...  . . 11 

Total  . . 18« 


Add  to  ^be  foregoing  the  fact  that  the  press  of  Massachusetts  almost 
ananimously  admits  the  alarming  increase  of  intemperance,  vice,  and 
crime  under  the  License  Law.  Papers  that  advocated  license,  alike  with 
those  that  opposed  it,  admit  this.  Then,  what  good  citizen  can  support 
“the  license  system,”  which,  the  Massachusetts  State  Board  of  Charitie* 
®y  (Fifth  Report,  p.  38),  “ has  been  tried  with  little  success  in  Europe  and 
Am  erica  since  the  sixteenth  century  ” ? 


frauaBiD  by  the  Natioxu.  Temperance  Society  and  Pcrucation  Hooaa 
No.  58  Keadb  Street  New  Tobk. 

AT  S3  FEB  TbOUSAXD. 


No.  70. 

Rum  and  Taiation  under  Licensr 

- BY  EKV.  WM.  M.  THAYEK, 


Tee  trial  of  a License  Law  in  Massachusetts,  for  one  year,  aftei 
the  trial  of  Prohibition  for  more  than  ten  years,  furnishes  man} 
instructire  statisbics  for  taxpayers  throughout  the  land  to  study. 
All  the  restraints  of  prohibition  were  swept  away  by  the  Novembof 
election  of  1867,  in  which  the  License  movement  prevailed.  At  once 
the  sale  of  intoxicating  liquors  was  renewed  with  vigor,  and  intern- 
perance  rapidly  increased,  filling,  as  Governor  Claflin  says,  in  hii 
message  to  the  Legislature  of  1869,  State  Prison,  Jails,  ani 

Houses  of  Correction,"  thereby  confirming  the  prophetic  language  of 
Governor  Bullock,  in  his  message  to  the  Legislature  of  1868,  respect- 
ing the  License  Law  enacted  : 

“ It  leads  into  temptation  the  young  men  and  the  weak ; it  spreads 
a snare  for  the  stranger  and  the  unwary ; it  is  destructive  of  the 
Influence  of  the  family  and  the  fireside;  adverse  to  good  morals,  and 
repugnant  to  the  religious  sentiment  of  the  community.” 

The  Report  of  the  Board  of  State  Charities  to  the  late  Legislature 
supplies  the  facts,  which  we  commend  to  the  attention  of  taxpayers 
everywhere.  'Phe  Report  is  made  up  from  September  30,  1867,  to 
September  30,  1868,  so  that  it  embraces  less  than  eleven  months 
tinder  the  License  movement. 

The  Board  of  Charities  say: 

“The  increase  of  intemperance,  which  the  reaction  of  last  year 
against  the  strictness  of  prohibition  has  greatly  promoted,  interferes 
at  once  with  our  industrial  interests,  fosters  pauperism  and  disease 
and  swells  the  list  of  criminals.  That  intemperance  has  increased 
will  appear  from  the  prison  statistics,  soon  to  be  submitted ; that 
crime  and  vice  n.ave  also  increased  will  be  shown  by  the  same  impartial 
text,  as  well  as  confirmed  by  the  observation  of  all  who  have  attended 
to  that  subject,  and  noticed  what  has  been  going  cn  the  past  year.” 

They  say  of  “ vagrants  or  traveljing  paupers,”  p.  172 : 

“ The  number  reported  under  this  cJassificatiou  for  the  year  eudms; 
September  30,  1868,  x^Jifty-six  tliousarai  three  hundred  and  eighty-tuxf, 
Bgainst  25,621  the  previous  year.-'- 

This  includes  the  “ lodgers  ” of  Boston,  nearly  all  of  whom  weM 
the  victims  of  the  liquor  traffic.  There  were  more  bhan  25.000  of 
this  class,  showing  that  Boston  was  doubly  cursed  by  me  sale  of 

rum. 

The  Board  adds : 

“Excluding  these  Boston  lodgers,  a very  large  proportion  of  wbooB 


2 


BUM  AND  taxation  0NDEE  LICENSE. 


Bre  duplicates,  we  shall  find  the  excess  of  vagrants,  or  travelliiig 
paupers,  about  five  thousand  over  the  number  reported  for  1867,  when 
the  Proliibitory  Law  was  well  enforced.” 

ITiey  say,  on  page  171 : 

“The  total  expenditure  incurred  by  cities  and  towns  for  full  and 
partial  support  [of  paupers]  has  been  upwards  of  |332,000-  -ac 
Increase  of  nearly  .^75,000  over  the  preceding  year.” 

Of  the  State  Prison  they  say,  p.  88  . 

“ The  hope  expressed  in  the  last  Report,  that  the  average  nuiaber 
here  would  continue  to  decrease,  as  during  the  year  previous,  has 
been  disappointed,  and  the  coininitnients  during  the  past  year  have 
been  one  hundred  and  eighty  to  one  hundred  and  twenty-eight  the  year 
before.  But  this  was  written  before  the  breaking  doivn  of  the  harriers 
against  the  sale  of  intoxicating  drinks ; and  it  is  to  this  cause  that  the 
prison  authorities  ascribe  the  increase  of  their  convicts — a conclusion 
which  the  registers  of  this  Bureau  would  seem  to  confirm.'" 

Speaking  of  commitments  to  all  the  prisons  of  the  Stale,  they  say, 
on  page  78 ; 

“The  whole  number  of  persons  committed  to  the  jails  and 
Houses  of  Correction  is  larger  by  about  one-third  tlmn  last  year,  as  is 
also  the  aggregate  number  of  prisoners,  while  the  number  committed 
for  the  non-payment  of  fines  and  costs  is  also  considerably  increased, 
being  4,275  against  3,663  tlie  year  before.” 

And  yet  the  earnings  of  the  prisoners,  though  so  largely  increased 
in  numbers,  they  say,  were  than  those  of  1867.” 

On  page  433,  Table  XL.,  General  Statistics  of  the  Town  Paupers, 
we  learn  that  the  “whole  number,  including  vagrants  of  the  town's 
poor  supported,”  was,  in  1867,  57,261,  while  in  1868  the  number  was 
91,157 — thirty-three  thousand  eight  hundred  and  ninety-six  more  under 
License  than  under  Prohibition  ! 

The  foregoing  remarks  of  the  Board,  together  witli  the  facts  pre 
sented,  make  it  unnecessary  to  quote  tlieir  tables,  but  simply  theii 
statement  of  the  per  cent,  of  the  increase  of  crimes,  after  their  sum- 
ming up,  on  page  350 : 

“ As  compared  with  1867,  it  will  be  seen  that  crimes  against  the 
person  have  increased  about  13.7  per  cent.,  crimes  against  property 
about  8.7  per  cent.,  crimes  against  public  order  and  decency  have  in- 
creased about  10.2,  and  crimes  of  all  kinds  have  increased  about  lea 
per  centP 

Of  drunkenness,  they  say,  (p.  39) : “While  crime  in  general  hap  ta- 
creased  only  about  ten  per  cent.,  drunkenness  has  incre<iscd  more  tnati 
Urke  as  much,  or  twenty-four  per  cent." 

These  figures  are  more  significant  when  we  compare  them  with  the 
reports  of  the  Board  for  1866  and  1867.  In  1866.  w'hen  the  effects  of 
the  war  were  most  direful,  and  before  the  State  Police  had  entbreed 
the  laws  vigorously,  the  Board  of  Charities  say  (Thii'd  Rep.,  p.  388) ; 

“ As  compared  with  1865,  it  will  be  seen  tliat  crimes  against  tin 
person  hare  increased  about  36  per  cent. ; crimes  against  property 


RUM  AND  TAXATION  UNDER  LICENSE. 


3 


febout  16  per  cent. ; crimes  against  public  order  and  decency  about 
28  per  cent. ; and  crimes  of  all  kinds  about  27  per  cent.” 

The  next  year  tlie  Prohibitory  Law  was  well  enforced  even  in 
Boston,  and  the  Report  of  the  Board  for  that  year  is : 

“As  compared  with  1860,  it  will  be  seen  that  crimes  against  th« 
person  have  decreased  5.2  per  cent.,  crimes  against  property  about 
8 jHir  cent.,  crimes  against  public  order  and  decency  have  increased 
\%  per  cent.,  and  crimes  of  all  kinds  decreased  3 per  cent.” 

liere  is  a year  of  prohibition,  well  enforced,  sandwiched  between  a 
fear  ot  unsnlbrced  Prohibitory  Law  and  License;  and  the  contrast  U 
remarkable.  As  soon  as  the  law  to  suppress  the  trafhe  in  liquor  was 
well  execihed,  the  aforesaid  class  of  crimes  diminished  rapidly. 
When  the  law  was  repealed,  that  class  of  crimes  again  rapidly 
increased.  And  now  that  the  Prohibitory  Law  is  restored,  the  police 
reports  of  all  cities,  like  Taunton  and  New  Bedford,  where  the  law  ifl 
thoroughly  executed,  show  a decided  decrease  of  crimes. 

The  crimes  against  persons,  public  order,  and  decency  are. those 
which  intemperance  especially  multiplies. 

The  aforesaid  per  cent,  is  for  the  whole  State.  The  figures  are  far 
more  startling  for  Boston  or  Suffolk  County,  which  is  the  feeder  of 
intemperance  in  the  State.  In  his  last  Report  the  State  Constable 
says,  “ Not  far  from  twenty-five  per  cent,  increase  has  been  added  to 
the  various  correctional  and  pauper  institutions  of  Suffolk  County.” 

It  is  evident  that  the  increase  of  pauperism,  vice,  and  crime  has 
increased  the  eoepenses  of  the  State  to  support  these  evils ; so  that  tax- 
payers can  readily  estimate  the  increase  of  this  kind  of  taxation 
under  License  by  bearing  in  mind  the  foregoing  per  cent,  of  increase 
of  pauperism  and  crime  last  year.  This  class  of  expenses  for  the 


whole  State  is  as  follows : 

State  and  County  Prisons  and  House  of  Industi-y  ....  $451,305  83 

State  Almshouses 174,426  57 

Town  Almshouses 832,501  65 

Lunatic  Hospitals 107,229  99 

Reformatories 122,866  23 

Charitable  institutions  aided  by  State 185,649  74 

Aad  interest  on  $6,000,000  invested  in  prisons,  alms- 
houses, hospitals,  etc 360,000  00 


Total $2,233,980  01 


Nor  is  this  all  the  annual  expense  of  these  and  kindred  evils  to  the 
people  of  the  Commonwealth.  There  are  a large  number  of  charit- 
able societies  and  institutions,  like  the  House  of  the  Angel  Guardian, 
Female  Uloral  Reform  Society,  Children’s  Friend  Society,  Boston 
Provident  Association,  etc,,  etc,,  supported  by  private  charity.  In  all 
the  cities  and  larger  towns  of  the  State,  and  in  many  of  the  smallei 
communities,  such  charitable  societies  exist,  drawing  thousands  an- 
nually from  the  purses  of  citizens.  1'he  Board  of  State  Charities,  in 
their  report  to  the  Legislature  of  1866,  estiipated  the  amount  of  pri- 
vate charities  for  the  year  at  $1,509,000,  and  said  that  “at  least  two- 
thirds  was  applied  to  the  relief  of  pauperism,.''''  The  amount  could  not 
bate  been  less  last  year,  when  intemperance  increased  .so  laigely 


4 


mjM  AJTD  TAXATION  UNDEE  LICENSE. 


throughout  the  State.  Add  the  private  to  the  public  charities,  and  wo 
have  the  enormous  sun  of  Three  million  seven  hundred  and 

THIRTY-THREE  THOUSAND  NINE  HUNDRED  AND  EIGHTY  DOLLARS  AND 

ONE  CENT  ($3,733,980  01)  as  the  cost  of  crime  and  pauperism,  with 
their  attendant  evils,  to  Massachusetts  under  License  for  the  year  end- 
ing September  30,  1868.  Nor  does  tliis  estimate  include  the  costs  of 
courts  and  legal  processes,  loss  of  labor,  and  other  actual  expenses 
And  losses  occasioned  by  the  traf&c  in  intoxicating  liquors. 

Now,  the  Board  of  State  Charities  say  (p.  145) : ‘‘  The  proportion 
ef  crime  traceable  to  this  great  vice  [intemperance]  must  be  set 
down,  as  heretofore,  at  not  less  than  four-fifths so  that  “ four- 
fifths,”  or  eighty  per  cent.,  of  the  foregoing  charities  are  the  direct 
tax  of  rum  upon  the  citizens.  Four-fifths  of  $3,733,980  01  are 
$2,987,184,  which  we  may  call,  in  round  numbers,  and  still  be 
within  the  truth,  three  million  doll.yrs — the  actual  tax  which 
rum-sellers  levied  upon  the  people  of  the  State  last  year.  And 
the  per  cent,  of  increase  of  crime  mentioned  by  the  Board  of  Charities 
is  the  direct  tax  levied  by  License,  which  would  have  been  greatly 
swelled  another  year  if  License  had  continued,  since  every  month 
the  tide  of  ruin  rises  higher  and  higher  under  the  free  or  licensed  sale 
of  liquors. 

The  direct  Rum  Tax  in  Massachusetts  for  1868  was  three  million 
dollars!  Were  there  no  intoxicating  drinks,  the  tax  to  support 
p.auperism,  crime,  and  attendant  evils  would  have  been  only  orte- 
fifth  as  large  1 Nearly  $2.50  for  every  man,  woman,  and  child  in  the 
State  was  taxed  by  rum  in  1868 ! Add  to  this  the  cost  of  rum 
itself.  The  sales  of  3,500  licensed  rum-sellers  (the  number  last  year), 
at  an  average  of  $10  per  day,  would  exceed  twelve  million  dol- 
lars ! Worse  than  wasted,  too!  And  the  wnlicensed  sellers  were 
many,  of  which  we  make  no  account.  Is  it  strange  that  taxpayer! 
groan  under  the  burden  ? Rum-sellers  grow  rich,  while  honest 
citizens  economize  and  struggle  to  support  the  victims  of  the  traffic  I 

The  crime  and  pauper  tax  of  last  year — three  million  doll.ars— 
would  build  300  houses  of  worship,  at  $10,000  each,  one  for  almost 
every  town  in  the  State;  or,  it  would  support  3.000  teachers  on 
a salary  of  $1,000  each ; or  pay  the  salaries  of  all  the  clergymen  and 
teachers  of  Massachusetts ; or  construct  3,000  cottages  for  the  poor, 
at  an  expense  of  $1,000  each ! 

This  is  only  the  money  side.  Arithmetic  cannot  compute  the 
domestic  and  social  miseries  spread  by  licensing  the  sale  of  liquors. 
The  young  men  debauched,  the  husbands  and  fathers  lured  to  ruin, 
the  homes  made  desoLate,  the  hearts  broken,  the  lives  sacrificed  by 
the  traffic,  and  the  widespread  demoralization  of  the  people,  do  so 
fcdmit  of  computation  or  d ascription. 


(•uBUsaai*  BT  THB  National  Tbmperance  Society  and  Pcblicatioh  Hov<!& 
No.  68  Eeade  Street  New  York, 

AT  Its  per  Tbousand. 


Wo.  76 


WHY  WE  OPPOSE  THE  TRAFFIC. 


BY  REV.  A,  SUTHERLAND. 


trS  arguments  usually  employed  in  favor  of  the  sale  and  use  ot 
intoxicating  liquors  as  a beverage  may  all  be  reduced,  I think,  to 
these  three,  viz. : 1.  The  financial  benefit  which  the  traffic  confers 
Up-m  the  country  at  large ; 2.  The  benefit  of  alcoholic  drinks  to  the 
consumer,  when  used  in  moderation ; and,  3.  The  right  of  man  to 
do  as  he  pleases.  My  first  proposition  in  answer  to  this  defense  is 

IVAT  I’HE  COUNTRY  GAINS  NOTHING,  IN  A FINANCIAL  POINT  OF 
VIEW,  BY  THE  TRAFFIC  IN  STRONG  DRINK.  In  Order  to  prove  that 
any  basiness  is  a financial  benefit  to  the  country,  we  should  be  pre- 
pared to  show  that  it  increases  the  amount  of  active  capital,  or  else 
that  it  develops  some  branch  of  national  industry.  That  a largo 
amount  of  capital  is  invested  in  the  business  is  undeniable ; but  a 
little  consideration  will  convince  any  unjirejudiced  mind  that  tho 
same  amount  of  money,  directed  in  other  channels,  Yvould  be  of  far 
greater  good  to  the  country.  The  large  income  derived  by  the  Gov- 
ernment is  admitted,  btit  it  should  also  be  remembered  that  there  is 
a heavy  account  on  the  other  side.  There  is  a debit  as  well  as  a 
credit  side.  On  the  credit  side  you  may  put  the  amounts  received 
for  licenses,  and  for  excise  and  import  duties ; then,  on  the  debit 
side,  put  the  salaries  paid  for  collecting  those  duties ; the  sums  paid 
for  the  suppression  of  crime  caused  by  the  use  of  strong  drink ; the 
amounts  paid  by  public  and  private  charity  for  the  support  of  pau- 
pers made  so  by  the  same  means ; the  value  of  the  property  tvhich 
strong  drink  annually  destroys — and  you  will  have  an  army  of  figures 
considerably  greater  than  those  on  the  credit  side. 

And  this  is  not  all ; for  we  have  yet  to  estimate  the  loss  which 
the  industry  of  the  country  sustains  through  the  drinking  ciisto!r.s 
of  the  day.  Let  it  be  remembered  that  wery  day  spent  in  idlenese 
by  a working-man — say  a mechanic — is  not  only  so  much  lost  to 
himself  and  his  family,  but  it  is  so  much  taken  from  the  aggregate 
wealth  of  the  country  at  large.  If  any  one  doubts  this,  let  him  cej 
culate  what  would  be  the  result,  financially,  if  all  the  laborers, 
farmers,  mechanics,  etc, , were  to  suspend  labor  entirely  for  'ne 
The  result  would  be  national  bankiuptcy  and  universa.  famine. 


WHY  WE  OPPOSE  THE  TKAFPIC. 


» 

Every  day,  therefore,  which  is  lost  to  productive  labor,  tends  M 
aiuch  to  impoverish  the  country. 

“Bat,”  the  objector  will  say,  “supjtose  that  the  traffic  were  aboi 
Ished,  would  not  the  large  amount  of  capital  now  invested  in  it  bs 
kOflt  to  the  country?”  Not  at  all,  I answer;  it  would  simply  he 
tamed  into  other  channels,  which,  if  not  so  remunerative  to  the 
mvestor,  would  be  much  more  beneficial  to  the  country.  I think 
that  every  unprejudiced  man  will  admit  that  the  gain  to  the  natiiXl 
would  be  inconceivably  great,  if  the  capital  now  employed  in  tha 
liquor  business  were  used  to  develo23  the  mineral  or  other  resource* 
©f  the  land. 

My  second  proposition  is: 

That  the  use  of  intoxicating  liquoes,  as  a beveeage,  is 
HBVEE  beneficial  TO  THE  INDIVIDUAL: 

1.  He  is  not  benefited  financially. — No  one  can  suppose,  for  a mo- 
ment, even,  that  indulgence  in  strong  drink  helps  a man's  finances. 
This  seems  to  me  to  be  so  self-evident  that  it  needs  no  argument. 
Every  year  hundreds  of  men  are  reduced  to  poverty  by  drunkenness ; 
but  who  ever  heard  of  such  a habit  heljiing  its  victim  to  fortune  ? 

2.  He  is  not  benefited  ‘physically. — It  has  always  been  a strong 
point  with  our  oiipoueuts  that  by  the  moderate  use  of  alcoholic 
liquors  a man  is  made  stronger  and  better  fitted  to  endure  fatigue, 
and  that  the  habit  conduces  to  health  and  Jong  life.  In  order  to 
see  how  little  force  there  is  in  this  argument  it  will  be  necessary  to 
ascertain,  1.  Of  what  these  jiernicious  beverages  are  composed ; and, 
2.  What  is  their  effect  ujion  the  human  system.  As  to  the  first, 
most  of  them  are  comjiosed,  chiefly,  of  two  substances,  water  and 
alcohol.  Now  from  wdiich  of  these  is  the  benefit  derived  ? Is  it 
from  the  w'ater  ? Truly,  water  is  a most  useful  and  important  ele- 
ment in  the  economy  of  nature.  It  dissolves  the  food  in  the  stom- 
ach, holds  it  in  solution,  and  carries  it  to  the  various  parts  of  th« 
system  to  rejiair  the  waste  of  tissue  that  is  continually  going  on. 
But  let  it  be  carefully  noted,  that  just  as  soon  as  water  is  mixed 
with  alcohol,  its  solvent  poicer  is  neutralized.,  and  the  process  of  diges- 
tion is  at  once  impeded.  Alcohol  interferes  with  digestion  in  tws 
ways — by  impairing  the  action  of  the  gastric  juice,  and  by  injuring 
the  coats  od.  the  stomach.  Now,  that  which  impedes  the  progiess 
of  digestion  must  take  from,  instead  of  adding  to,  the  vital  jiows 
of  the  system. 

I have  said  that  most  alcoholic  liqpors  are  composed  of  two  sub- 
stances, water  and  alcoliol.  But  M-hat  is  alcohol  ? It  is  a aubstancs 
Bever  compounded  in  Nature's  laboratory,  but  is  produced  by  a pro 


WHY  WE  OPPOSE  THE  TBAPPIG. 


8 


eess  of  fermentation,  that  is,  of  decay.  Suppose  we  put  the  ques- 
tion to  an  intelligent  chemist,  “ What  is  alcohol  ? — Is  it  an  article 
of  food?”  He  will  reply,  “Certainly  not;  it  is  not  food,  and  you 
can  not  convert  it  into  food.  Take  any  quantity  you  please  into 
the  system,  and  it  goes  through  no  process  of  digestion ; it  repairs 
fio  waste,  nor  can  you  by  any  possible  method  convert  it  into  nou! 
jthmcnt.”  We  further  ask,  “ AVhat,  then,  is  aleohol  ?”  And  he  wiL- 
promptly  answer,  “ It  is  a powerful  narcotic  poison  - lust  as  reallj 
S poison  as  prussic  acid  is.  Poison  is  its  true  name  and  jioison  is 
its  nature,  and  you  can  not  make  anj-thing  else  of  it.  Now,  what  is 
the  effect  of  this  aleohol  when  taken  into  the  liuma”  system  ? Let 
toe  answer  in  the  w'ords  of  Dr.  Alden,  of  Massachusetts : 

“ On  ei^ery  organ  they  touch,  ardent  spirits  operate  as  a poison. 
S^owhere  in  the  human  body  are  they  allowed  a lodgment,  until  the 
vital  powers  are  so  far  prostrated  that  they  can  not  be  removed. 
They  are  hurried  on  from  one  organ  to  another,  marking  their  coursa 
with  irregularity  of  action  and  disturbance  of  fuuct'on.  until  at  last 
they  are  taken  iqi  by  the  emunctories,  the  scavengers  of  the  system, 
and  unceremoniously  excluded.  When,  through  d«cay  of  organic 
vigor,  this  process  ceases,  tlie  work  of  destruction  is  drawing  to  a 
close,  and  the  last  glimmerings  of  life  are  soon  extine-uished.  To  a 
man  in  health  there  is  no  such  thing  as  a temperate  use  of  spirits- 
In  any  quantity  they  are  an  enemy  to  the  human  constitution- 
Their  influence  upon  the  physical  organs  is  unfavorable  to  health, 
riiey  produce  weakness,  not  strength;  sickness,  not  health  ; death, 
not  life.” 

But  while  alcohol  produces  derangement  and  disease  of  the  diges- 
tive organs,  the  principal  eifect  is  upon  the  great  nf^-vous  centers, 
especially  the  brain.  At  first  the  result  is  pleasing  but  as  the 
quantity  is  increased,  and  the  habit  grows,  the  eifect  becomes  fright- 
ful. That  which  at  first  gave  rise  to  a pleasing  exuberance  of  fancy, 
now  rouses  up  a whirlwind  of  baleful  passions.  Reason  loses  its 
controlling  power,  and  the  shattered  bark  drifts  hopelesoly  onward, 
entil  it  strikes  upon  the  rocks  of  crime,  and  then  goes  dewm  foreves 

3.  Neither  is  he  hettered  in  a moral  and  social  point  oj'  view  ; foj 
tiong  drink  so  blurts  all  of  his  moral  perceptions,  the«t  the  moat 
solemn  appeals  are  thrown  away ; and  it  so  destroys  all  if  the  finer 
feelings  and  sympathies  of  his  nature,  so  that  the  once  loved  hus- 
band and  affectionate  father  becomes  a mere  brute — n"-y.  worse,  a 
Send.  Instance  upon  instance  might  be  given  to  illastmte  this 
point,  but  they  are  so  frequently  met  by  us  all,  that  I need  not 
farther. 


■WHT  WE  OPPOSE  THE  TEAEPIC. 


« 

If  these  are  some  of  the  effects  produced  by  strong  drinks,  wh* 
will  dare  to  say  that  a man  is  made  better,  physically,  mor&Uf.  of 
socially,  by  the  use  of  them  ? 


FOUNDATION  PRINCIPLES. 

1.  That  the  drinking  system,  including  the  manufacture,*  sat*, 
sad  use  of  alcoholic  liquors,  as  a beverage,  is  the  greatest  evil  in 
our  land. 

2.  That  all  intoxicating  liquors  are  absolutely  useless  for  every 
purpose  of  life,  as  articles  of  diet. 

3.  That  social  moderate  drinking  creates  the  unnatural  appetite, 
which  is  the  principal  cause  of  that  wide-spread  scourge — Intem- 
perance. 

4.  That  all  alcoholic  drinks  are  injurious  to  the  health  of  the 
body  and  the  mind,  even  when  taken  in  “ great  moderation,”  as  it 
is  called. 

5.  That  it  is  contrary  to  the  will  of  God,  and  consequently  sinful 
and  immoral,  to  convert  the  food  of  the  people  into  liquid  poison, 
that  naturally  destroys  the  bodies  and  souls  of  men. 

6.  That  intoxicating  wines  or  alcoholic  cb'inks  are  nowhere  rec- 
>mmended  or  commanded  in  Scri23ture3  to  be  used  as  a beverage. 

7.  That  it  is  the  sujjply  of  alcoholic  liquors  furnished  by  the 
manufacturers  and  venders  of  the  poison  that  creates  the  unnaturaX 
demand,  and  not  the  demand  the  supply. 

8.  That  as  the  traffic  in  alcoholic  liquors  is  injurious  to  trade  and 
commerce,  and  is  the  principal  cause  of  poverty  and  crime  as  well 
as  physical  and  mental  disease,  it  is  the  duty  of  the  Government  to 
put  it  dorni  by  legislation. 

9.  That  total  and  universal  abstinence  from  making,  selling,  and 
drinking  intoxicating  liquors  is  God’s  remedy  for  the  intemperanco 
»f  which  we  comjjlain. 

10.  That  teetotalism  is  not  a mere  matter  of  expediency,  but  ia 
scientific  fact,  based  on  chemistry,  physiology,  and  Christian  cm 
ta.ity. 


PVBUBIQX  BY  THE  NaTIONAI  TeMPEBANCE  SOCIETY  AND  rillll  ||  ||  W— ) 

House,  No.  68  Eeade  Stkeet,  two  doobs  west  or  Bboadwae, 

New  Yobs,  at  $3  feb  Thousand. 


No.  9a 


THE  RUM-SELLEE  A ROBBER. 


& NEW  APPLICATION  OP  THE  PARABLE  OF  THE  GOOD 
SAMARITAN. 


BY  REV.  LUTHER  KEENE. 

“And  Jeans  answering  said,  A certain  man  went  down  from  Jemsalem  to  Jert 
Eho,  and  fell  among  thieves,  which  stripped  him  of’his  raiment,  and  wounded  hwt, 
and  departed,  leaving  him  half-dead." — Luke  x.  30. 

is  a noticeable  fact  that  persons  who  read  this  parabla 
uniformly  take  sides  with  the  good  Samaritan  and 
condemn  the  thieves.  I am  not  aware  of  a single 
exception  on  record.  Of  the  many  sermons  that  have 
been  preached  on  the  subject,  all  are  of  this  character. 
And  it  must  be  confessed  that  the  narrative  as  given  by  our 
Saviour  seems  to  justify  this  view  of  the  case. 

But  I propose  to  call  your  attention  in  this  discourse  to  the 
other  side  of  the  question,  and  see  what  may  be  said  in  favor  ot 
the  robbers ; premising  this  only,  that  the  robbers  of  the  parable 
be  allowed  to  represent  rum-sellers  of  the  present  day. 

By  rum-sellers  I mean  persons  who  sell  as  a beverage  liquors  of 
any  kind,  weak  or  strong,  which  are  intoxicating. 

1.  In  the  first  place,  it  may  be  said  on  the  side  of  the  robbers 
that  they  were  established  in  the  husiness.  It  was  generally  under- 
stood that  they  had  in  a certain  sense  taken  possession  of  the  way 
leading  from  Jerusalem  to  Jericho.  The  road  lay  through  a wild 
and  rocky  district,  well  adapted  for  their  purposes.  The  rugged 
steeps  and  dark  caverns  gave  them  protection.  Here  they  made 
their  strongholds.  Public  sentiment  might  have  been  against  their 
practice,  but  they  cared  little  for  public  sentiment  so  long  as  they 
prospered  in  business.  Familiar  with  danger  and  hardships,  they 
were  not  men  to  be  frightened  from  their  gains  by  the  wishes  of 
their  opponents.  They  had  risked  too  much  in  the  enterprise  te 
be  easily  intimidated.  Their  entire  capital  was  invested  in  it. 
They  bad  provided  themselves  with  the  necessary  implementi. 


2 


THE  ET7M-SEELEB  A EOBBEE. 


The  energetic  and  thorough  manner  in  which  they  lid  their  worts 
shows  that  they  were  well  established  and  well  furnished  for  busi- 
ness. Possession  is  usually  regarded  as  presumptive  evidence  of  a 
rightful  claim.  It  may  be  objected  that  in  the  case  of  the  rot  bent 
the  character  of  the  business  vitiated  this  claim.  Perhaps  so.  A&3 
yet  if  this  argument  is  urged  to  day  in  favor  of  anottrr  class  of 
robbers  who  infest  most  of  our  towns,  and  especially  our  laig« 
cities,  as  it  surely  is,  I see  no  good  reason  why  those  of  more  pri- 
mitive times  should  not  have  the  benefit  of  it.  If  comparativa 
innocence  and  harmlessness  have  any  weight,  the  advantage  is  *er- 
tainly  in  favor  of  those  who  had  their  headquarters  on  the  road  to 
Jericho. 

2.  It  was  a lucrative  business.  The  income  was  large  in  pro- 
portion to  the  outlay.  Men  like  to  invest  where  the  returns  will 
be  liberal.  This  is  an  acknowledged  principle  in  all  legitimate 
business.  Robbers,  ancient  and  modem,  have  yielded  to  this  pro- 
pensity. They  aim  to  secure  the  largest  profits  possible  from  the 
least  expenditure,  whether  of  labor  or  capital.  Probably  no 
species  of  robbery  has  ever  been  more  successful  in  this  direction 
than  modem  rum-selling.  It  costs  so  little  to  make  four  gallons  out 
of  one  where  water  is  plenty,  or,  better  still,  to  imitate  choicest 
liquors  from  the  cheapest  drugs,  that  the  receipts  are  nearly  all 
profit.  (There  is  a work  before  me  entitled  “ The  French  Wine 
and  Liquor  Manufacturer : A Practical  Guide  and  Receipt  Book 
for  the  Liquor  Merchant.”  From  the  introduction  I copy  the  fol- 
lowing; “ We  call  the  special  attention  of  the  reader  to  our  article 
headed  ‘ A new  Process  by  which  to  make  cheap  Wines  by  Fer- 
mentation.’ This,  we  think,  is  one  of  the  most  valuable  chapters 
in  our  book,  as  it  contains  the  important  secret  by  the  use  of 
which  several  large  manufacturers  in  this  and  in  other  cities  are 
annually  making  fortunes.”  In  one  of  the  recipes  referred  to, 
which  produces  G3^  gallons  of  wine,  “ 60  gallons  of  water”  is  its 
first  item.  This  is  sold  as  “ the  pure  juice  of  the  grapa”)  It  is 
easy  to  see  how  “ large  fortunes  are  made  annually  ” so  long  u 
water  can  be  sold  for  wine.  It  may  be  objected  to  this  reasoning 
that  those  rough  and  ill-mannered  robbers  of  the  East  were  noi 
pursuing  a legitimate  business,  and  therefore  had  no  right  to  their 
gains.  There  is  certainly  ground  for  such  an  objection.  And  yet 
if  it  is  a valid  objection  against  robbers  on  the  highway  I see  no 
ivason  why  it  is  not  equally  weighty  against  the  more  adroit  and 
ratifitk  ooerators  of  the  dram-shops.  The  former  make  their  profit! 


THE  EUM- SELLER  A BOBBER. 


3 


!»}  yii  lence,  the  latter  by  seduction  and  cheating.  The  formei  fell 
their  victim  at  a single  blow  and  strip  him  of  his  clothes  and 
treasures,  and  leave  him  “ half-dead  ” perhaps,  and  yet  able  to  re- 
(fovtJi  under  the  ministry  of  the  good  Samaritan,  with  charactet 
and  manhood  left,  and  business  ability  left  to  make  another  for- 
tune, it  may  be.  The  latter  also  bring  their  victims  to  the  groimd, 
only  they  take  a longer  time  for  doing  it.  But  when  it  is  done  it  ia 
done  thoroughly.  There  is  no  rising  again  for  those  thus  slain. 
They  strip  the  man  not  only  of  his  clothes  and  treasures,  but  of 
cnaracter  and  manhood,  and  all  noble  virtues.  When  the  robbers 
of  the  dram-shop  have  had  a fair  chance  and  have  finished 
their  work,  their  victims  are  beyond  recovery.  They  leave  them 
not  “half-dead”  merely,  but  tvrice  dead — dead  in  body  and  ia 
spirit.  Shall  we  say,  then,  that  the  work  of  the  former  is  wrelawful, 
and  the  work  of  the  latter  lawful  ? Wherein  does  the  lawfulness 
of  robbery  through  rum  consist  ? In  its  larger  profits  ? Unques- 
tionably it  is  more  profitable  than  robbery  by  violence.  In  its 
gradual  method  ? It  does  take  longer  time  to  accomplish  its 
object.  In  its  greater  effectiveness  ? Beyond  question  the  ruin  it 
works  is  more  complete  and  irreparable  than  that  fi'om  the  assna- 
•in’s  blow. 

Looking  at  it  from  our  stand-point,  there  are,  it  is  true,  grave  ob- 
jections against  robbery  in  any  form ; but  we  must  remember  that 
the  robber  looks  at  it  from  the  opposite  side.  With  him  the  good 
of  society,  the  rights  of  citizens,  and  the  safety  of  life  are  min.ii 
considerations.  The  income  from  business  is  what  he  is  bent  oa 
and  what  he  is  bound  to  have,  whatever  may  be  the  incidental  dL<* 
comfort  to  others. 

3.  In  the  thfrd  place,  the  robbers  of  the  parable  might  have  acted 
upon  the  principle  that  the  end  justifies  the  means.  We  should 
give  them  the  advantage  of  this  argument,  as  nothing  is  said  to  tha 
contrary.  To  be  STire  they  had  a rough  way  of  procuring  money, 
but  they  might  have  used  it  for  worthy  objects.  Doubtless  they 
had  families  dependent  upon  their  exertions.  Possibly  they  might 
have  been  liberal  in  the  use  of  their  gains ; thieves  and  robbers  ara 
often  said  to  be.  Possibly  they  might  have  given  much  in  charity. 
It  is  even  conceivable  they  might  have  contributed  for  the  relief  o/t 
the  wife  and  children  of  their  victim,  if  the  fact  of  their  destitutioa 
had  come  to  their  knowledge.  Such  things  have  been  known.  Ay, 
they  might  have  given  largely  toward  the  erection  and  support  at 


4 


THE  ETTM-SELLEB  A EOEBER. 


•sylnms  for  the  maintenaixe  of  widows  and  orphans — thote  vrhtn 
they,  by  their  bloody  deeds,  had  made  'widows  and  orphans. 

Whether  this  was  the  reasoning  and  the  practice  of  the  robber* 
or  not,  it  is  the  reasoning  and  practice  of  the  rum-sellers.  There  are 
Bcruples  as  to  the  means  by  which  money  is  taken  from  the  'victims  of 
the  dram-shop.  Sellers  themselves  are  not  easy  about  it.  Con- 
science troubles  them.  But  they  find  great  relief,  if  not  full  justifi- 
cation, in  the  good  use  they  make  of  the  money.  Rum-sellers  ara 
generous,  it  is  said.  When  the  poor  man  has  paid  for  drink  his 
last  cent,  and  turned  from  the  shop  on  a 'wintry  night,  stagsrering 
to  his  home,  where  ■wife  and  children  are  shivering  for  fire,  and  cry- 
ing for  food,  the  rum-seller  may  send  after  him  coal  for  another  fire- 
and  bread  for  another  meal.  Rum-sellers  are  generous  men.  When 
the  subscription  paper  comes  around  for  means  to  keep  the  family 
from  starvation,  he  who  has  taken  their  property  in  exchange  for 
rum,  subscribes  liberally.  Unquestionably  rum-sellers  are  generous 
men.  When,  at  length,  charity  is  exhausted  and  the  -wTetched  suf- 
ferers take  shelter  in  the  poor-house,  and  the  tax  bill  for  supporting 
them  there  is  presented,  he  who  has  occasioned  their  poverty  pays 
the  bill  cheerfully.  Sm’ely  rum-se’.Iers  are  generous  men.  Or  when 
the  ■victim  of  rum,  driven  to  desperation,  resorts  to  crime,  and  is 
thrust  into  prison,  he  who  has  robbed  him  of  -virtue,  and  driven  him 
to  crime,  may  pay  his  proportion  of  the  costs  of  arrest,  trial,  and 
imprisonment  without  a murmur.  Most  assuredly  rum-sellers  must 
be  generous  men. 

And  more  than  this.  They  help  build  alms-houses  for  the  poor 
and  asylums  for  inebriates,  and  houses  of  refuge  for  the  licentious, 
and  jails  and  prisons  for  criminals,  and,  in  addition  to  their  contri- 
butions in  money,  furnish  more  inmates  for  them  all  than  all  other 
classes  in  the  community  combined.  Are  they  not  generous  men 
indeed  ? 

Higher  motives  than  these,  even,  sometimes  engage  their  efibrta, 
if,  indeed,  there  are  any  higher  motives  than  building  asylums  and 
prisons,  and  filling  them  with  wretched  sulferers.  From  the  profits 
ef  rum-selling  they  help  build  churches,  support  the  Gosjel  at  hrine, 
and  sustain  missions  abroad.  A part  of  the  very  money  procured 
ia  the  work  of  ruining  men  they  consecrate  to  the  work  of  redeem- 
ing men.  Does  the  end  justify  the  means  ? The  friends  of  the 
trafiic  sometimes  take  this  view  of  it.  If  the  argument  is  goorl  ia 
his  case,  what  I insist  upon  is,  that  we  give  those  robbers  of  old  the 
benefit  of  it,  and  all  like  them,  who  conduct  their  business  -with  th« 


THE  RHM-SELLEB  A BOBBER. 


s 


bowie-knife  and  revolver — a more  summary  way,  indeed,  but  one  fkr 
less  injurious  in  its  consequences  to  society  than  that  conducted 
through  the  dram-shop 

Thus  far  this  discussion  has  assumed  that  rum-sellers  are  robbers. 
They  are.  The  evidence  is  only  too  abundant.  Does  the  robber 
disturb  the  peace  of  society  by  lawless  violence  ? The  rum-sellei 
does  the  same,  only  on  a thousand-fold  greater  scale.  Does  the  rob- 
ber take  that  which  belongs  to  another  without  giving  an  equiva- 
lent ? The  rum-seller  does  worse  than  that.  He  takes  th(!  money 
and  gives  in  return  that  which  destroys  the  man.  Does  the  robber 
Bumetimes  take  life  in  his  struggle  to  secure  his  victim’s  treasure  ? 
Where  one  man  has  been  slain  by  violence,  a thousand  have  been 
slain  by  rum.  If,  then,  the  rum-seller  is  guilty  of  all  the  crimes 
which  constitute  robbery,  is  there  any  conceivable  reason  why  wa 
should  not  call  him  a robber  ? Shall  his  excess  of  guilt  over  othe  r 
criminals  secure  for  him  the  indulgence  of  mankind  ? Shall  the 
magnitude  of  his  crimes  win  for  him  the  respect  of  society  ? 

Facts  touching  the  loss  of  money,  and  the  loss  of  labor,  and  the 
lo'ss  of  time,  all  declare  the  rum-seller  is  a robber.  There  is  another 
kind  of  evidence  which  shows  how  painfully  true  this  is — evidence 
that  comes  home  to  all  our  hearts.  I need  only  refer  each  one  to 
his  own  experience.  If  rum  had  robbed  us  only  of  money,  our 
hearts  would  have  been  spared  much  of  the  anguish  they  have  suf- 
fered. We  have  been  robbed  of  kindred  and  friends.  Take  the 
family  register  and  run  back  over  the  list.  You  will  not  go  far 
before  you  come  to  a name  the  very  sight  of  which  fills  your  heart 
with  anguish.  What  memories  are  wrapped  up  in  that  name  1 
What  struggles  with  temptation  it  recalls ! What  scenes  of  alter- 
nate joy  and  sorrow,  what  pledges  made  and  broken,  what  tears  of 
repentance  and  bitter  regrets,  and  solemn  vows  I Perhaps  he  was 
the  most  brilliant  in  promise  of  the  whole  circle,  the  most  afi'ection- 
ate,  the  most  noble,  the  best  beloved.  And  yet  that  name  tells  you 
of  the  sad,  the  unutterably  sad  story  of  your  loss. 

Alas  1 what  volumes  of  evidence  do  these  family  records  contain, 
if  we  trace  them  back  a generation  or  two,  that  rum.  not  content 
with  taking  the  coarse  and  common  treasures,  has  robbed  almost 
©very  household  of  some  precious  life  ! 

IT  the  representations  made  are  true,  inferences  of  the  most  impor- 
tant and  practical  character  follow  : 

1.  If  the  rum-seller  is  a robber,  then  he  ought  to  be  called  a rob 
bw  and  treated  as  a robber.  The  law  should  treat  him  as  sucb 


6 


THE  RTTM-SELLEE  A EOBBEE. 


Public  opiuion  should  so  regard  him,  and  make  him  feel  that  at  u 
BO  regarded.  The  rum  seller  should  be  made  to  feel  that  so  sooc  u 
he  enters  the  business,  he  cuts  himself  off  from  the  rights,  the  re- 
s|)cct,  the  privileges  of  a citizen — that  he  has  as  truly  forfeited  all 
claims  to  the  friendship  and  favor  of  society,  and  to  the  protectioa 
of  law,  as  the  robber  has  when  he  enters  upon  his  course  of  crime. 
Rum-selling  should  be  made  so  infamous  in  public  opinion  that  no 
man  could  afford  to  practise  it,  no  matter  how  great  the  mercenary 
profit.  So  long  as  a man  can  maintain  his  standing  in  social  life,  so 
long  as  he  can  be  recognized  as  a good  nciglibor,  and  a kind  friend, 
and  an  honorable  citizen,  and  especially  so  long  as  he  can  retain  hia 
standing  in  the  church  and  be  acknowledged  as  a Chiistian  bro- 
ther, there  will  be  enough  men  eager  for  the  business.  But  let  all 
this  be  reversed.  Let  people  show  the  rum-seller  by  their  conduct 
that  they  regard  him  a foe  to  every  interest  of  society — let  them 
treat  him,  in  short,  as  they  treat  the  robber,  and  no  man  who  lays 
any  claim  to  respectability  will  care  to  be  a rum-seller.  It  will  cost 
too  much.  The  profits,  large  as  they  may  be,  'uill  not  compensate 
the  loss  of  the  confidence,  and  reputation,  and  respect  he  must  for- 
feit, and  will  afford  no  inducement  for  him  to  incur  the  scorn  and 
contempt  of  mankind.  Do  you  say  this  would  be  unjust  and  un- 
merciful, and  the  man  ought  to  have  a fair  chance  ? No ; it  is  the 
business  which  is  unjust  and  unmerciful,  and  so  long  as  he  continues 
in  this,  he  deserves  no  chance  save  that  of  a criminal.  If  he  desires 
the  sympathy  and  regard  of  his  fellow-men,  let  him  abandon  the 
traffic  in  rum. 

Would  you  expect  to  see  the  good  Samaritan,  whc  ministered  to 
the  wounded  man,  and  those  ruffians  who  robbed  him,  and  left  him 
half-dead,  meeting  the  next  day  as  friends,  cordially  exchanging 
the  courtesies  and  compliments  of  social  life,  walking  arm  in  arm 
to  church,  sitting  together  at  the  communion-table,  the  Samarit.an 
excusing  the  robbers  for  wounding  the  poor  man.  thanking  them 
ihat  they  left  liim  only  half-dead  when  they  might  have  killed  him, 
and  the  robbers  in  turn  thanking  the  Samaritan  for  binding  up  th« 
wounds  which  their  weapons  had  made?  No;  you  would  exi)ect 
no  such  thing.  You  would  say,  the  law  first,  the  Gospel  afterwards. 
You  would  give  the  Gospel  of  mercy  to  the  wounded  man,  and  ap- 
ply the  law  of  justice  to  the  robbers.  While  you  bound  up  the 
wounds  of  the  one,  you  would  take  away  the  weapons  from  the 
others.  But  while  the  robber  retained  his  w eapons,  and  insisted  on 
orwetising  his  reckless  basiness,  you  would  shut  him  out  from  Hu 


THB  RLM-SELLER  A BOBBBi:. 


T 


family,  shut  him  ^ut  from  the  social  circle,  shut  him  out  from  busi- 
ness confidence,  sh  it  him  out  from  the  church,  shut  him  out  from 
eyery  place  except  the  prison.  That  will  be  the  only  place  wher« 
he  has  a right  to  go.  Be  consistent.  If  the  rum-seller  is  a robber, 
treat  him  in  the  same  way  so  long  as  he  pursues  the  business,  and 
thus  wars  upon  every  interest  of  humanity.  Let  public  sentiment 
be  as  intense  against  the  rum-seller  as  his  offence  is  injurious  to  so- 
ciety, and  there  would  be  no  difficulty  in  executing  the  law — there 
would  be  no  longer  need  of  prosecutions  and  penalties.  As  the 
manslayer  of  old  fled  from  the  avenger  of  blood  to  the  cities  of  re- 
fuge, rum-sellers  would  flee  to  the  very  prisons  and  knock  foi 
entrance,  in  order  to  escape  the  scorn  and  contempt  of  an  outraged, 
indignant  public. 

2.  If  this  representation  of  the  rura  traffic,  and  those  engaged  in  it, 
is  correct,  it  ought  to  settle  our  convictions,  and  determine  our  con- 
duct in  all  the  legal  aspects  of  the  question. 

We  have  no  objections  to  passing  laws  against  robbery.  Society 
cannot  be  too  well  guarded  against  that  crime.  There  is  little 
danger  that  the  laws  shall  be  too  stringent  or  too  well  executed.  If 
rum-selling  is  robbery,  differing  from  the  crime  that  passes  by  that 
name  only  in  its  methods,  and  exceeding  that  a thousand-fold  in 
its  disastrous  consequences,  then  why  shall  we  hesitate  to  legislate 
against  rum-selling  ? Is  there  danger  that  society  shall  be  too  well 

Erotected  from  drunkenness,  from  pauperism,  from  licentiousness, 
'om  cruelty,  dishonesty,  thei'ts,  suicides,  murders — froui  the  w'hole 
infamous  brood  of  vices  and  crimes,  of  which  intemperance  is  the 
immediate  cause  ? If  society  is  safe  and  prosperous  just  in  propor- 
tion as  it  is  delivered  from  these  things,  then  is  it  not  safe  to  legis 
late  against  the  cause  of  these  ? 

3.  This  view  of  the  subject  shows  what  the  duty  of  the  church 
must  be  in  this  struggle  against  intemperance. 

In  the  parable  we  are  told  that  the  priest  and  Levite,  scein"  the 
wounded  man,  “ passed  by  on  tlie  other  side.”  It  must  be  Cvuitessed 
that  some  of  the  pastors  and  officers  of  Christ’s  Cliurch  do  the  same 
still.  They  pass  so  far  from  the  fallen  brother  “ on  the  othei  side” 
as  to  come  nearer  the  robbers  than  their  victim — are  so  cautious  and 
BO  reluctant  to  protect  the  sufferers  from  intemperance  by  law, 
that  they  actually  throw  tlieir  influence  on  the  side  of  rum-selling. 
It  is  an  occasion  of  thankfulness  that  these  are  rare  exceptions 
It  is  an  occasion  of  shame  that  the  exceptions  should  exist. 

Clearly,  the  question  with  every  member  and  minister  of  the 
church  is,  or  ought  to  be.  What  does  the  Word  of  God  teach  on  the 
subject?  Where  does  the  Bible  class  the  sin  of  drunkenness?  In 
the  Epistle  to  the  Galatians  the  apostle  gives  its  fixmily  connections. 
He  mentions  the  prominent  members  of  the  family  to  which  the 
drunkard  belongs:  “Adultery,  fornication,  uncleanness,  lasciviour- 
Bess,  klolatry,  witchcraft,  hatred,  variance,  emulations,  wrath,  strife, 
seditions,  heresies,  envyings,  murders,  drunkenness,  revelling?,  and 
such  like.”  Do  you  say  the  rum-sc/Zer  is  not  included  among  them  f 
No,  These  are  liis  children  the  legitunste  offsprings  of  rum-selling. 


THE  BUM-SELLER  A BOBBER. 


• 

If  the  respectahle  dealer  is  ashamed  of  his  connections,  and  refiisM 
to  take  his  place  among  them,  he  can  have  the  bad  pre-eminence  of 
standing  at  the  head  of  the  household.  Unquestionably,  the  'wboU 
tendency  and  effect  of  his  business  is  to  produce  just  this  brood  of 
Tices  and  crimes.  There  could  be  no  more  truthful  advertisement 
over  every  bar  and  liquor-shop  in  the  land,  descriptive  of  the  busi- 
ness, than  this  text.  It  tells  you  exactly  what  every  rum-seller  is 
doing — w'hat  characters  he  is  manufacturing  and  sending  out  to 
CUTS-;  society 

That  liquor  is  the  immediate  cause  of  most  all  the  crimes  and  im- 
moralities mentioned  above,  is  proved  by  facts  known  to  all.  War- 
den Haynes,  in  his  “ Pictures  from  Prison  Life,”  says : “ Since  I have 
been  connected  with  the  prison,  we  have  had  twenty-one  here  for 
killing  their  waves,  two  for  killing  their  fathers,  and  one  for  killing 
his  mother.  Of  these  twenty-four,  all  but  one  were  not  only  habi- 
tual drunkards,  but  actually  drunk  v\'hen  they  committed  the  crime. 
. . . . These  were  not  bad  men,  except  when  thev  were  under 

the  influence  of  liquor.”  Then  the  crime  must  be  attributed  to  the 
liquor.  Without  that,  these  men  were  kind  in  their  families.  With 
it,  they  murdered  their  best  friends.  Is  there  any  doubt  as  to  the 
cause  of  the  crime  ? Kum-sellers  are  familiar  wdth  these  facts.  They 
Bell  to  the  inebriate  with  a full  knowledge  of  tlie  consequences  likely 
to  follow'.  Is  the  drunkard,  who  murders  after  reason  has  gone, 
guilty,  and  he  who  has  been  instrumental  in  taking  away  reason 
guiltless  ? Human  law'  may  condemn  the  former,  and  acquit  the  lat- 
ter, but  will  He  so  judge  who  looks  at  the  heart  ? Let  the  rum-seller 
remember  that  the  case  will  be  review'ed  at  a higher  than  human 
court.  He  must  meet  his  fallen  brother  at  another  bar — and  how 
different  w'ill  it  be  from  the  one  at  which  they  parted,  from  behind 
which  he  dealt  out  the  deadly  poison  ! Then  he  must  answer  the 
question  to  the  Omniscient  Judge,  “ Guilty  or  not  guilty  ?”  What 
will  be  his  answer  ? What  is  the  answ'er  of  conscience  now  f 

Read  again  that  list  of  crimes  enumerated  by  the  apostle,  and 
mark  W'hat  follows  : “ They  which  do  such  things  shall  not  inherit 
the  kingdom  of  God.”  That  is  God's  prohibitory  law.  Shall  we 
dare  to  license  w'hat  God  has  forbidden  ? 

Temperance  and  its  family  relations  <are  mentioned  by  the  apostle 
in  the  same  connection  : •'  Love,  joy,  peace,  long-suffering,  gentle- 
cess.  goodness,  fldlh,  meekn  'ss,  temperance.  Against  such  there  if 
BO  law.”  This  is  God’s  liccLse  law.  Shall  we  prohibit  what  God 
kas  permitted?  Shall  we  dare  to  throw  our  influence  and  vote 
against  these  heavenly  virtues  and  in  favor  of  that  other  dark 
brood  of  sin  and  woe  ? May  H''aven  save  us  from  so  great  a crime 
against  our  brother — from  so  gi  at  a sin  against  our  God  ! 

PubIjIshed  bt  tee  National  Tempftance  Society  and  Publicatioh 
House,  No.  68  Keade  Steeet,  two  dooes  wtst  of  Bboadwai. 

New  Yobk,  at  $6  peb  Thousank. 


No.  97. 

ACCOUNTABLENESS  FOR  THE  EYILS  OF 
INTEMPERANCE. 


BY  EEV.  JOSEPH  C.  FOSTER. 


“Neither  be  partaker  of  other  men’s  sins.” — 1 Tim.  v.  22. 


T must  be  acknowledged  that  we  may  share  largely 
in  the  responsibility  of  sins  committed  by  others. 
Few  are  alone  in  sinning  ; in  nothing  is  there  more 
companionship.  By  providing,  in  any  way,  for  the 
entrance  of  another  upon  a wrong  course,  or  con- 
tributing to  his  facilities  for  continuing  therein,  we  become 
his  associates  in  criminality.  To  render  any  assistance  what- 
ever to  a transgressor  of  law,  whether  human  or  divine,  aa 
oy  giving  our  consent  to  his  transgression  or  lending  our 
sanction  thereto,  we  become  transgressors  with  him.  There 
may  be  partnership  with  evil-doers  by  patronizing  or  au 
thorizing  them  in  their  misconduct,  as  well  as  by  partaking 
of  their  unlawful  gains.  Hence,  if  others  will  sin,  let  us  not 
sin  with  them,  for,  sinning  with  them,  we  must  in  some  way, 
and  at  some  period,  suffer  with  them. 

Of  course  we  are  partakers  of  other  men’s  sins  when  we 
actually  commit  the  same  sins,  and  thus  by  our  example 
and  influence  encourage  them  to  sin.  And  the  same  is  true 
whfen  we  place  temptations  in  the  way  of  others  so  as  to  be 
the  means  of  leading  them  astray.  And  when  we  authorize 
the  sins  of  others  and  fail  to  restrain  them,  we  are  also  par- 
takers of  their  sins.  To  sanction  the  sins  of  others  by 
allowing  them  to  go  unrebuked  and  unchecked,  is  to  share  in 
the  guilt  of  the  sins  thus  tolerated,  and  virtually  if  not  act- 
uall3^  licensed. 

These  considerations  apply  with  all  their  force  to  the  uat 
and  sale  of  whatever  intoxicates  as  a beverage.  Liquor- 
drinking  and  liquor-selling  are  to  be  viewed  from  this  point 
of  observatiom 


SINFUL  EXAMPLE  OP  DRINKING. 

All  who  drink  intoxicating  beverages,  by  their  example 
end  influence  encourage  others  to  drink,  and  so  become  in 
ao  small  degree  responsible  for  the  evil  which  may  result 
ft'om  their  example,  Ho  one  can  drink  without  influencing 
Others  to  drink,  and  if  they  drink  so  as  to  be  ruined,  he 
whose  example  was  the  occasion  of  their  drinking  must  be 
held  aceountable  for  the  results  of  his  influence  in  this  re 
rfpect.  He  was  not  duly  mindful  of  the  apostolic  injunc- 
tion, “ that  no  man  put  a stumbling-block  or  an  occasion 


2 ACCOITirrABLENESS  FOK  THE  EVILS  OF  INTE MPEE ANCE. 

to  fall  in  his  brother’s  way,”  nor  did  he  imitate  an  apostle’s 
noble  ^philanthropy,  avowed  when  lie  said,  “ If  meat  make 
my  bi'other  to  olfend,  I will  eat  no  tiesh  while  t ae  world 
standeth,  lest  1 make  my  brother  to  offend.”  His  practice 
encouraged  others  to  injure  and  destroy  themselves,  and  he 
must  answer  for  his  selfish  indulgence.  I am  seen  drinking 
that  which  may  intoxicate,  und  some  one  who  is  struggling 
to  overcome  the  power  of  appetite  concludes  that,  if  I can 
justify  myself  in  this,  he  may  also  do  the  same,  and  that 
conclusion  may  involve  his  ruin.  Now,  who  can  say  that 
in  this  case  I am  not  a partaker  of  his  sin  in  thus  destroy- 
ing himself,  and  who  will  attempt  to  show  that  it  is  a small 
share  which  I have  in  the  sin  of  that  victim  of  my  perni- 
cious examjjle,  which  caused  him  to  fall  as  he  might  not 
otherwise  have  fallen  ? 

FEARFUL  ACCOUNTABILITY  FOR  SELLING, 

And  with  even  more  truth  may  it  be  said  that  he  who 
sells  to  those  who  drink  is  a partaker  of  their  sin  in  drink- 
ing. Those  who  sell  intoxicating  beverages  directly  con- 
tribute to  the  almost  unparalleled  evil  caused  by  drmking. 
But  for  places  in  which  the  deadly  drams  are  sold,  and 
persons  by  whom  they  are  sold,  there  would  be  little  or  no 
drinking.  He  who  provides  a place  and  occupies  a place 
for  this  purpose  is  responsible  for  the  ruin  thus  wrought. 
Every  one  who  sells  liquor  to  be  used  as  a beverage  is  a 
drunkard-maker,  and  the  responsibility  of  making  drunk- 
ards cannot  be  evaded  by  him.  No  such  person  can  say, 
“ It  is  no  concern  of  mine  if  men  become  drunkards.”  It  is 
some  concern  of  his,  and  he  is  not  guiltless  in  this  matter. 
In  a multitude  of  cases,  the  seller  is  more  to  be  blamed  than 
the  drinker.  Every  seller  knows  that  the  most  moderate 
drinker  to  whom  he  sells  is  becoming  a drunkard  by  every 
drop  that  he  sells.  If  it  were  not  for  drunkard-making,  there 
would  be  no  business  for  the  liquor-seller,  and  his  occupa- 
tion would  soon  be  gone.  All  that  sustains  his  business  is 
drunkard-making ; let  that  cease,  and  he  has  nothing  more 
to  do.  !So  soon  as  a stop  is  put  to  drunkenness  there  will 
be  an  end  of  the  liquor-trafiic.  If  from  this  time  no  more 
drunkards  were  to  be  made,  there  would  be  no  more  occa- 
sion for  another  person  to  engage  in  the  liquor  busiuesa 
for  drinking  purposes.  Moderate  drinking,  of  which  there 
could  be  any  assurance  that  it  would  not  result  in  drunken- 
11868,  (iould  not  sustain  the  traffic,  which  could  exist  oulj  a 
short  time  were  it  only  to  supply  such  a demand.  M ith 
only  occasional  exceptions,  moderate  drinkers  become  drunk- 
hrds.  To  drink  at  all  is,  in  most  cases,  to  drink  excessively 


ACOOUNTABLBNBSS  FOB  BHE  EVILS  OP  lIjrEMPEBANOE.  9 


and  ruinously.  There  is  no  safety  out  cf  total  abstinence. 
Every  drunkard  who  ever  went  to  a drunkard’s  grave  began 
to  drink  moderately.  In  the  responsibility  of  causing  all 
the  harm  which  comes  from  what  is  called  moderate  drink- 
ing, those  engaged  in  the  liquor  traffic  are  largely  con- 
cerned. Their  business  should  be  called  drunkard-making, 
and  they  are  partakers  of  the  sins  of  drunkards,  and  theira 
is  a far  greater  sin  than  the  sin  of  the  drunkards  whom 
they  make  drunkards. 

CRIMINALITY  OF  LICENSING. 

And  those  who  do  anything  in  favor  of  licensing  the  sale 
of  intoxicating  liquor  to  be  used  as  a beverage,  are  par- 
takers of  the  sin  of  those  who  drink  to  excess.  Nothing  is 
so  well  calculated  to  give  the  traffic  respectability  and 
power  to  do  harm  as  licensing  it.  When  this  is  done,  we 
can  no  longer  expect  that  it  will  be  regarded  as  disrepu- 
table. Who  can  say  that  it  is  not  honorable  when  it  is 
licensed?  Pointing  to  his  license,  the  liquor-seller  can 
claim  that  his  occupation  is  not  only  lawful,  but  also 
moral  and  useful.  He  must  remain  unlicensed  in  order  to 
be  ranked  with  such  criminals  as  are  his  true  fellows  in 
crime ; for  if  licensed  he  is  removed  from  the  same  cate- 
gory with  them.  To  license  him  is  to  assign  him  an  unde- 
served place  among  good  citizens,  where  he  cannot  be 
looked  upon  as  the  open  and  avowed  enemy  of  law  and 
order.  Shall  he  be  thus  raised  above  his  proper  level, 
which  is  oTily  with  the  most  worthless  and  dangerous  men? 
God  forbid  ! If  liquor-sellers  are  t(»  be  legisflated  into  men 
of  good  reputation,  then  let  all  other  culprits,  even  the  very 
worst,  be  at  once  introduced  into  good  standing  in  society. 
If  liquor-selling  is  to  be  licensed,  ihen  let  every  species  of 
iniquity  be  licensed.  Better  far  would  it  be  to  license  bur 
glary  or  arson,  counterfeiting  or  forgery,  theft  or  murder. 
Not  so  much  harm  would  come  from  licensino;  the  greater 
wrongs  and  outrages  to  which  society  is  exposed,  as  must 
come  from  licensing  this  parent  vice  and  giant  crime. 
Liquor-selling  has  unquestionably  occasioned  more  ruin 
than  can  be  traced  to  any  other  cause  of  suffering,  and,  I 
had  almost  said,  all  other  causes  combined.  To  no  other 
cause  but  this  can  fifty  thousand  deaths  annually  in  this 
country  alone  be  attributed.  From  nothing  else  does  nine- 
tenths  of  all  the  pauperism  and  crime  result  as  from  this 
prolific  source  of  evil.  It  is  only  when  we  look  in  this 
direction  that  we  see,  as  it  were,  the  fatal  opening  of  Pan- 
dora’s box,  and  feel  assured  that  were  it  not  for  this  dread- 
ful traffic  there  would  hardly  be  any  occasion  for  alms- 


4 ACCOITNTABLBNESS  POE  THE  EVttS  OP  INTEMPEEA3TCE. 

houses  or  prisons,  or  indeed  any  provisions  to  meet  the 
requirements  of  now  existing  evils.  There  is  no  such 
standpoint  for  viewing  the  heaviest  hiw'dens  wliich  we  are 
comjoelled  to  bear  as  when  we  can  say,  If  no  more  liqucr 
should  be  sold,  taxation  would  be  reduced  more  than  six- 
eighths,  and  in  a still  greater  jiroportion  there  would  !)& 
a diminution  of  degradation  and  infamy,  grief  and  vu’etrh- 
edness.  The  success  of  any  eftbrt  to  serve  the  liquor- 
dealers  by  giving  them  a license  must  be  the  greatest  of 
calamities.  The  most  dreaded  visitation  of  the  cholera 
could  not  be  named  as  an  evil  in  comparison  i\'ith  this. 
The  yellow  fever,  in  the  worst  form  in  which  it  ever  pre- 
vailed in  any  Southern  city,  would  not  be  so  disastrous  as 
a licensed  liquor  traffic,  which  causes  more  suffering,  and 
destroys  more  bodies  and  souls,  than  any  terrible  epidemic 
or  horrible  wickedness.  Xo  visitation  or  abomination  is 
60  much  to  be  deplored ; nothing  so  scandalous  or  villan- 
ous  as  to  be  so  deprecable.  If  such  a crowning  evil  is  to 
exist,  let  it  be  without  the  sanction  of  law.  Let  it  not  be 
made  legally  respectable,  and  let  not  those  engaged  in  ex- 
tending it  have  a license  with  which  to  quiet  their  own 
consciences  and  silence  all  the  complaints  made  against 
them  by  an  outraged  community.  To  aid  in  giving  them 
a license  is  to  be  a partaker  of  their  sin.  It  is  permitting 
and  assistin'^  them  to  sin ; it  is  encoiiracrin"  and  inducing: 
them  to  sin  ; it  is  sinning  with  them.  Withholding  licenses 
may  not  entirely  prevent  the  sale  of  that  which  intoxicates, 
but  it  does  leave  unsahctioned  by  law  the  great  crime  in- 
volved in  drunkard-making,  and  it  undoubtedly  limits  the 
extent  of  the  nefarious  business.  It  must  necessarily  operate 
as  a restraint  upon  the  worst  traffic  ever  attemptei 

NECESSITY  OP  PKOHIBITION. 

But  we  are  not  to  stop  here.  Xot  to  license  the  sale  of 
liquor  requires  the  prolnhition  of  the  sale.  Free  trade  in 
this  article  cannot  be  allowed.  There  have  always  been 
more  or  less  restraints  imposed  upon  this  traffic.  Society 
has  always  guarded  itself  in  some  way  against  the  evils 
caused  by  those  dealing  in  this  dangerous  commodity. 
Xeither  free  trade  nor  restricted  or  regulated  trade  in 
intoxicating  drinks  can  be  permitted.  The  only  alterna 
live  is,  impartial  and  entire  prohibition  of  the  traffic,  so 
far  as  supplying  a Ireverage  is  concerned.  Prohibition  is 
a necessity ; nothing  else  will  meet  the  case.  The  strong 
hand  of  interdictory  law  must  be  laid  upon  the  traffic,  and 
the  loud  and  imperative  voice  of  irrevocable  veto  must  bo 
ttttered  iu  the  vender’s  ear,  saying  to  him,  “ You  must  stop 


ACCOtTNTABLENESS  FOB  THE  EVILS  OF  INTEMPERAIICE.  A 

this  destructive  business.  You  must  cease  to  seek  your 
own  benefit  at  the  expense  of  so  many.  Your  business 
cannot  be  tolerated.  It  must  be  wholly  given  up.  It  is 
absolutely  prohibited.”  Every  liquor-seller  must  be  made 
to  understand  that  he  cannot  adopt  that  method  of  gain- 
getting. The  justice  of  this  cannot  be  questioned.  Society 
is  carefully  guarded  by  prohibitory  laws  against  evils  of 
much  less  magnitude  than  drunkard-making.  It  is  univer- 
eally  acknowledged  that  there  can  be  no  safety  in  any  com 
munity  if  every  person  is  allowed  to  consult  only  his  own 
inclinations  in  bis  actions,  independent  of  all  prohibitions. 
All  are  agreed  that  there  are  some  things  which  must  be 
prohibited,  or  else  society  could  no  longer  exist.  No  one 
seriously  calls  in  question  the  propriety  or  necessity  of  such 
restrictions  as  are  placed  upon  piracy  or  highway  robbery, 
and  various  other  invasions  of  common  rights  from  which 
society  is  liable  to  suffer,  and  against  which  prohibitory 
laws  are  enacted.  The  murderer  vvho  takes  the  life  of  his 
victim  by  any  other  instrument  of  death  than  that  furnished 
by  the  intoxicating  cup,  in  so  doing  forfeits  his  own  life. 
The  man  who  seeks  to  enrich  himself  by  dishonest  gains, 
whether  by  robbery  on  land  or  sea,  or  by  counterfeiting  or 
forgery,  gambling  or  swindling,  is  made  to  feel  the  power 
of  the  civil  authority,  which  has  imposed  stern  restraints 
upon  these  criminal  acts.  Yet  what  one  of  these  crimes 
had  not  better  be  left  unrestrained  than  that  of  causing 
intemperance  with  all  its  woes  ? The  thought  of  tolerating 
such  abuses  by  allowing  them  to  exist  without  subjecting 
the  offenders  therein  to  severe  punishments  is  not  for  a 
moment  entertained  by  any  but  those  imjiroperly  inter- 
ested. With  one  consent,  various  descriptions  of  injurious 
persons  are  interrupted  in  their  employments ; and  various 
kinds  of  fraudulent  gains  are  positively  forbidden ; and  no 
one  objects  to  these  abridgments  of  freedom,  unless  it  be 
upon  the  ground  defined  in  the  familiar  couplet : 

“ No  man  e’er  felt  the  halter  draw 
With  good  opinion  of  the  law.” 

OTHEE  EVILS  NOT  REGULATED,  BUT  PROHIBITED. 

Protection  is  demanded  and  secured  by  society  against 
numerous  classes  of  dangerous  men  and  brutes.  The  fitness 
of  this  is  universally  conceded.  All  admit  that  the  law 
must  say  that  our  houses,  shops,  and  stores  shall  not  be 
invaded  by  those  who  “ break  through  and  steal,”  and  that 
our  money  shall  not  be  rendered  worthless  by  loase  imita- 
tions, flooding  the  community  with  spurious  coin  and  cur- 
rency. I<et  a burglar  commit  his  depredations  upon  oul 
daces  of  residence  or  business,  and  how  would  the  whftla 


# ACCOtTNTABLENESS  FOB  THE  EVILS  OT  INTEMPEBAUCE. 

community  be  aroused,  and  at  once  the  police  force  vould 
be  employed  for  the  detection  of  the  felonious  intruder. 
Everybody  is  intensely  excited,  and  the  most  trifling  cir- 
cumstances serve  to  aivaken  suspicion,  which  may  fall  on 
the  innocent  as  well  as  the  guilty.  Let  the  actual  oftender  be 
arrested,  and  how  little  mercy  is  shown  him  ! He  has  taken 
a little  property  that  did  not  belong  to  him,  and  he  must 
go  to  the  state  prison.  But  he  has  not  beggared  the  family 
whose  goods  he  has  stolen;  he  has  not  taken  away  the 
whole  estate,  even  house  and  home ; he  has  not  clothed  the 
household  in  rags,  and  reduced  them  to  hunger  and  want. 
No — he  has  not  caused  the  misery  which  comes  to  the 
drunkard’s  family.  He  has  not  unmanned  and  brutalized 
the  husband  and  father,  broken  the  heart  of  the.  wife  and 
mother,  and  cursed  the  worse  than  orphan  children.  Bur- 
glary may  be  prohibited,  and  no  one  objects ; but  liquor- 
selling must  be  regulated,  licensed,  or  unmolested  ! 

If  a counterfeiting  establishment  should  be  discovered,  it 
would  not  long  remain  without  being  broken  up  by  the 
arrest  of  those  engaged  in  this  prohibited,  business,  and  the 
confiscation  of  their  property  thus  criminally  invested. 
But  what  harm  has  been  done  by  this  unlawful  concern 
compared  with  the  evil  resulting  from  a single  dram-shop  ^ 
A few  individuals  have  suffered  a little  loss  by  having  some 
bad  money  passed  noon  them,  but  at  the  most  their  losses 
are  not  equal  to  wiiat  it  costs  them  in  taxes  to  support 
drunkard-making,  to  say  nothing  of  bad  de’ots  occasioned 
by  liquor-selling.  Why  should  counterfeiting  be  prohib- 
ited ? It  is  harmless  compared  with  the  liquor-trafiic. 

A mad  dog  is  seen  running  in  the  streets,  and,  though  he 
should  not  stop  to  bite  a single  person,  there  woifld  be  the 
greatest  excitement,  and  his  life  would  be  sought  with  the 
utmost  eagerness.  Nor  is  it  strange  that  this  strong  feeling 
is  aroused ; for  the  bite  of  a mad  dog  is  fatal,  and  the  death 
thus  produced  is  dreadful.  But  is  not  the  traflic  in  intoxi- 
cating drinks  fatal  also,  and  the  death  of  the  unhappy  vic- 
tims sometimes,  if  possible,  even  more  terrible  than  ths 
death  of  those  w'ho  writhe  in  the  convulsions  of  hydro- 
phobia ? Ijideed,  there  can  be  but  little  to  choose  between 
the  delirium  tremens  and  the  hydrophobia.  If  anything 
the  latter  is  to  be  preferred.  Why,  then,  should  the  com- 
munity be  so  startled  when  a mad  dog  is  seen  or  heard  of 
which  at  the  worst  will  bite  but  a few  persons  before  he  is 
killed,  and  yet  be  so  indifferent  in  regard  to  places  in 
almost  every  town  more  to  be  dreaded  than  scores  of  mad 
dogs  at  large  to  do  their  worst?  And  surely,  if  there 
should  be  a place  where  mad  dogs  were  known  to  be  kept, 


A.CCOXrtrrABLBNBSS  FOB  THE  EVILS  OP  INTBMPEEAITCK.  1 

end  from  which  they  were  known  to  be  deliberately  .et 
loose  from  time  to  time,  it  would  not  be  long  before  some 
kind  of  restraint  would  be  put  upon  such  a dangerous 
place.  No  one  would  cry  out  against  prohibition  in  such 
a case.  And  yet,  how  much  worse  would  it  be  to  have  such 
a harboring-place  for  mad  dogs  than  to  have  a drinking- 
place  such  as  every  town  must  have,  in  greater  or  less 
numbers,  without  prohibitoi’y  legislation  ? 

The  prevalence  of  the  small-pox  results  in  placing  re* 
Btraiuts  upon  those  in  whose  houses  the  contagion  exists, 
and  should  they  through  carelessness  expose  tlieir  neigh- 
bors, it  would  not  be  easy  to  sustain  the  blame  which  they 
would  incur.  But  should  they  deliberately  spread  the  dis- 
ease, and  more  especially  if  they  should  do  this  for  gain, 
they  would  soon  be  made  to  feel  some  kind  of  restraint 
such  as  they  could  not  misunderstand.  And  yet,  is  there 
not  a contagion  even  worse  than  the  small-pox,  for  which 
toleration  is  asked,  from  which  the  community  sulFers  more 
than  could  be  apprehended  from  that  loathsome  disease; 
and  are  there  not  those  who  are  spreading  the  malady,  ot 
accidentally,  but  deliberately  and  intentionally,  and  tor 
gain?  Shall  they  be  unrestrained  and  unprohibited? 

NO  SUBSTITUTE  FOR  PROHIBITION. 

It  would  seem  that  no  one  in  his  right  mind  could  '^siil  to 
acknowledge  that,  if  there  is  any  evil  which  ought  to  be 
prohibited,  it  is  the  traffic  in  alcoholic  beverages ; for  there 
is  no  other  source  of  harm  to  which  society  is  so  danger- 
ously exposed  as  to  this  most  terrible  curse  of  humanity. 
Not  to  prohibit  it  is  to  sanction  and  perpetuate  it  with  all 
its  unparalleled  woes.  Liquor-selling  must  be  prohibited. 
It  cannot  safely  be  regulated ; for  all  regulation  is  tolera- 
tion, and  the  least  toleration  is  incompatible  with  suppres- 
sion. The  traffic  will  be  perpetuated  so  long  as  the  law 
allows  it  to  exist.  There  will  be  those  who  will  engage 
in  it  so  long  as  thev  are  suffered  to  thus  make  gain.  No- 
thing but  law  will  stop  them.  Legal  suasion  is  that  alone 
to  which  they  will  yield.  They  can  appreciate  no  argu- 
ments but  those  which  the  law  enforces.  All  other  per- 
suasions are  lost  upon  them.  Fines  and  imprisonment 
alone  afford  them  convincing  reasons  for  not  attempting 
to  secure  the  profits  of  drunkard-making,  that  employment 
being  so  very  lucrative  and  their  consciences  being  so  de- 
plorably seared.  Nothing  but  the  illegality  of  the  trafiic 
will  serve  to  diminish  its  victims.  Its  unlawfulness  alone 
will  prove  a barrier  to  its  prevalence.  So  long  as,  any  one 
can  lawfully  engage  in  it,  there  will  be  enough  to  se^  its 


8 ACCOUNTABLENESS  FOB  THE  EVILS  OF  INTEMPEBAHCK. 

gains  regardless  of  all  attendant  losses.  Moral  siiasio* 
must  not  be  less  employed  than  legal  coercion,  but  the 
latter  must  not  be  left  out  of  the  account  any  more  than 
the  former.  It  will  generally  be  found  that  moral  suasion 
will  avail  only  for  the  drinker,  and  that  compulsion  alone 
will  reform  the  seller,  who  asks  nothing  more  of  the  friends 
©f  temperance  than  to  confine  themselves  to  moral  efforts, 
letting  him  alone  so  far  as  the  law  is  concerned.  Little 
eares  he  for  anything  that  is  not  imperatively  commanding 
iu  its  legal  utterances,  saying,  “You  s/ia/^  cease  from  this 
fatal  work!”  For  drunkard-makhig,  as  the  result  of 
liquor-selling,  to  be  according  to  law,  in  any  community, 
is  a most  terrible  wrong,  which  ought  not  for  a moment  to 
be  thought  of  by  any  one  claiming  to  be  in  favor  of  tem- 
perance ; and  unless  there  is  a readiness  to  be  held  in  no 
small  degree  responsible  for  the  appalling  calamities  which 
come  from  the  authorized  sale  of  intoxicants  for  drinking 
purposes,  then  let  all  who  vote  not  fail  to  do  all  that  can 
ne  done  by  voting  to  unlegalize  this  deadly  traffic — yea, 
let  it  be  prohibited  by  all  that  voting  can  do  to  secure  an 
honestly  intended  and  really  eflfective  prohibitory  law  ; lest 
by  not  so  doing  the  delinquent  “ be  a partaker  of  other 
men’s  sins,”  even  those  of  the  drinker  and  the  seller,  the 
drunkard  and  the  drunkard-maker. 

SOBER  VIEW. 

Accountability  is  a serious  matter.  It  is  enough  for  any 
one  to  be  held  accountable  for  his  ovm  sins,  without  render- 
ing himself  liable  to  be  called  to  account  for  the  sins  of 
others ; and  when  that  accountableness  for  the  sins  of 
others  embraces  greater  sins  than  we  ourselves  ever  pre- 
sumed to  commit  directly,  it  is  surely  of  great  consequence 
to  us  that  we  may  be  relieved  from  all  liability  to  answer 
for  any  sins  but  our  own,  and  especially  the  sins  of  liquor- 
selling  and  liquor-drinking.  There  is  a fearful  account- 
ability incurred  by  those  ivho  drink  intoxicating  beverages 
and  those  who  sell  them,  and  those  who  do  anything  in 
favor  of  licensing  the  sale,  as  well  as  those  who  do  not  do 
all  in  their  power  to  secure  the  prohibition  of  the  sale  as 
a beverage  of  whatever  intoxicates.  From  this  point  of 
observation  there  is  most  intense  emphasis  given  to  the 
nords,  “ Neither  be  partaker  of  other  men’s  sins.” 


Published  by  the  National  Temperance  Society  and  Pub 
UCATION  House,  No.  58  Reade  Street  New 
York,  at  §6  per  Thousand. 


The  Evils  of  Beer  Legislation. 


BY  REV.  JAMES  B.  DUN]Sr,  D.D., 

PASTOB  OP  THE  BEACH  STREET  PRESBETEBIAH  OHlTRCa,  BOBTOSt. 


Judges  sometinjes  find  it  difficnlt  to  know  liow  to  shapo  their  charg® 
ftnd  juries  how  to  Irame  their  verdict,  and  we  how  to  Form  our  judgmeut 
an  men  and  things — the  evidence  is  conflicting,  not  clear  either  way,  and 
auiich  to  he  said  for  and  Against.  But  no  such  obscurity  suiTouuds  the. 
topic  assigned  us  on  this  occasion,  We  are  embarrassed,  uot  from  suy 
perplexity  attached  to  the  subject,  not  by  the  scantiness  of  evidence  at 
our  command  to  prove  that  there  are  evils  connected  with  beer  legisla- 
tion, but  by  the  a’bundance  of  proof  that  meets  us  on  every  hand  going 
to  show  that  the  beer  clause  in  the  prohibitory  law  is  evil,  only  evil,  and 
evil  continually.  Pressed  as  we  have  been  for  time  to  prepare  this 
paper,  we  take  advantage  of  what  one  has  well  said,  that  in  a court  of 
taw  two  or  three  competent  and,  in  every  way,  credible  witnesses  are 
held  to  be  worth  as  many  as  would  crown  the  court-house,  and  without 
further  preface  proceed  to  give  the  results  in  two  or  three  instances 
where  beer  legislation  has  been  tried,  thus  leaving  you  to  frame  your 
rerdict  on  the  divine  axiom,  “ The  tree  is  known  by  its  fruit.” 

First. — We  ask  your  attention  to  that  very  sad  mistake  made  by  the 
Parhameut  of  G^reat  Britain  in  1S30,  when  they  passed  “ An  act  to  per- 
mit the  general  sale  of  beer  aud  cider  by  retail  in  England.”  By  this  act 
any  householder  could,  on  giving  bouds  and  sm’utios,  and  paying  two 
guineas,  obtain  a license  to  sell  beer,  aud  on  the  payment  of  one  guinea 
obtain  a license  to  sell  cider.  The  object  sought  in  passing  this  bill  was 
to  wean  the  people  I'rom  spirit  drinking  by  cheapening  beer,  to  give  them 
a good,  wholesome  beverage  instead  of  the  abominations  then  sold.  In 
favor  ofthe  bill,  one  said  he  supported  it  because  “it  would  supply  the 
laboring  classes  with  a more  wholesome  beverage  than  they  now  enjoyed- 
and  preserve  their  morals  from  contamination.  He  believed  that  the 
number  of  grogshops  would  tend  to  keep  the  lower  orders  from  the  pub- 
lic-houses, and  thereby  promote  both  morality  and  comfort.” 

Lord  Somerset  said  tins  bill  “ would  substitute  good  beer  for  the  abo- 
minable adulterations.” 

Lord  Brougham  supported  the  bill  as  a means  of  reducing  adultera- 
tions ; and,  comparing  beer  with  gin,  he  said : “ It  was  giving  people 
what,  under  present  circumstances,  might  be  called  a moral  species  of 
beverage.” 

The  Duke  of  Wellington,  in  moving  the  second  reading,  said  : “ He 
was  sure  the  measm-e  would  be  attended  with  the  most  beneficial  conse- 
quences to  the  lower  orders.” 

The  Chancellor  of  the  Exchequer  declared,  “ The  measure  would  a* 
once  conduce  to  the  comfort  of  the  people  iu  affording  them  cheap  and 
ready  accommodations ; to  their  health,  in  procuring  them  a ‘ better  and 
more  wholesome  beverage  ’ ; and  to  their  moralitg,  iu  removing  them 
from  the  temptations  to  be  met  with  iu  a common  ale-house,  and  iutio- 
dueing  them  to  hou.jes  of  a bettor  order.” 

Thus  men  in  both  Houses  of  Parhainont  advocated  its  passage. 

Well,  the  bill  passed,  supported  and  del'ended  by  the  leading  philau>- 
thropists  aud  politiciaus  of  the  day,  and  it  is  alSrined  that  the  Duke  of 
Wellington  said  the  passage  of  this  biU  was  a greater  achievement  than 
any  of  his  military  victories ! 

The  consequences  were  soon  felt.  The  strongest  supporters  of  the 
measure  were  surprised  by  the  sudden  aud  general  domorafisatiou  pro- 


2 


THE  EVILS  OF  BEER  LEGISLATION. 


daoed.  For  example,  the  Rev.  Sidney  Smith  had  looked  to  the  passing 
of  this  bill  as  one  of  great  importance.  Only  two  weeks  after  the  act 
came  into  force,  he  writes : “ The  new  Beer  Bill  has  begun  its  operations. 
Everybody  is  drmik.  Those  who  are  not  singing  are"^  sprawling.  The 
sovereign  people  are  in  a beastly  state.” 

In  Liverpool,  within  nineteen  days  from  October  10,  as  many  as  800 
licenses  were  taken  out  under  the  act ; and  at  the  end  of  the  year  the 
licenses  appUed  for  and  granted  in  England  and  "Wales  rose  to  24,342. 
Testimonies  of  all  kinds  from  magistrates,  clergymen,  and  others,  began 
to  be  poured  in  as  to  the  demoralizing  effects  ol  the  bill,  so  that  next 
year  it  came  under  discussion,  and  many  members  of  both  Bouses  ex^ 
pressed  their  disappointment  at  the  working  of  the  measure.  Even  Lora 
Brougham  and  the  Duke  of  Wellington  expressed  a change  of  opinions 
so  soon  as  one  year  had  elapsed. 

Lord  Stanley,  M.  P.  for  Lancashire,  said  “ that  all  the  evils  were  not 
confined  to  the  agricultural  districts,  as  seemed  to  be  supposed.  He  be- 
lieved that  from  every  part  of  the  county  of  Laucashu'e  statements  had 
been  transmitted  to  the  Home  Secretary,  all  concurring  in  one  unani- 
mous opinion  as  to  the  evils  which  had  11  )wed  from  this  measure.” 

MiT.  Sadler  said  that  “ from  his  own  knowledge  he  could  declare  that 
these  beer  shops  had  made  many,  who  were  previously  sober  and  indus- 
trious, now  drunkards ; and  many  mothers  had  also  become  tipjjlers.” 

Lord  Francis  Edgartou  “considered  the  biil  as  promotive  of  enormous 
evils.  Ho  bill  had  ever  been  more  productive  of  drunkenness  and  immor 
ality  than  this.” 

The  English  press,  which  called  for  the  passage  of  the  bill  as  an  act  ol 
justice  to  the  common  people,  testified  after  it  had  been  tried  to  the 
same  effect  as  did  the  chaplains  ol'  prisons.  Thus  speaks  the  Globe  : 

“ The  injury  done  by  the  Beer  Act  to  the  p -ace  and  order  ol  the  rural  neighbor- 
hoods, not  to  mention  domestic  happiness,  industry,  and  i cononiy,  has  been  wed 
by  witnesses  from  every  class  of  society  to  have  exceeded  the  evils  of  any  single 
act  of  internal  administration  passed  within  the  m mory  of  man.” 

The  Liverpool  Mail  is  but  an  echo  of  this  : 

“ A more  pernicious  concession  to  popular  opinion  in  one  single  place— refer- 
ring to  the  cry  in  London  against  the  monop  dy  of  a fe  v of  the  brew  rs  there — un- 
called for  anywhere  else,  and  so  prejudicial  to  public  morals  in  the  rural  districts, 
in  the  villages,  liumlets,  and  roadsides  of  Etieland.  never  was  made  by  the  blind 
senators  of  a bad  g ivernmeut  in  the  worst  of  times.” 

In  1834,  a select  committee  of  the  House  of  Commons  was  appointed 
to  enquire  into  the  “ extent,  causes,  and  consequences  of  the  prevailing 
vice  of  intoxication.”  The  result  of  this  committee's  iuvestigatious  went 
to  show  that  the  act,  without  destroying  one  single  public-house,  added 
some  50,000  still  more  baneful  houses  to  the  list  of  temptations  already 
so  fatal  to  the  best  interests  of  the  people. 

In  1849-50,  a committee  was  appointed  by  the  House  of  Lords  to  en- 
quire into  the  operation  of  the  Beer  Act.  Before  this  committee  the  evi- 
dence adduced  was  most  conclusive  as  to  its  demoralizing  effects.  That 
committee  addressed  certain  queries  to  the  several  chap’iains  of  the 
English  county -jails.  The  answers,  though  of  necessity  made  independ- 
ently, were  ALL  in  one  and  the  same  strain ! Forty-six  chaplains  re- 
tmmed  answers  testifying  to  the  flood  of  vice  and  immorality  let  loose 
by  beer-houses.  Mr.  Barker,  the  chap’aiu  of  the  Hereford  County  Jail, 
declares:  “ However  lucrative  they  may  be  to  the  revenue  in  the  way 
of  excise  duties,  it  is  <at  the  expense  of  tue  best  interests  of  the  laboring 
poor,  and  entails  an  enormous  expense  iu  the  punishment  of  crimes  eon 
cocted  in  the  beer-shops,  and  committed  in  a state  of  intoxication.’' 
They  are  spoken  of  as  the  “ notorious  resort  of  thieves,’'  “ p’aees  ibr 
gambling,  for  idle  associations,”  relying  for  t’ucir  support  maiidy  on  the 
“encouragement  of  prostitution — a curse  in  any  parish,”  etc. 

The  Rev.  John  Clay,  chaplain  to  the  Preston  House  of  Correction,  says 
9n  the  passing  of  the  biU:  '‘Instantly  40,000  detss  were  opened,  each  of 


THB  EVILS  OF  BEER  LEGISLATION. 


s 


which  breeds  more  immorality  and  sin  in  a week  than  can  be  counteracted 
by  the  minister  of  religion  in  a year.  It  may  be  thouglit  that  this  i» 
mere  hyperbolic  declamation.  Ko;  I believe  it  impossible  for  human 
language  to  describe  the  misery  and  wickedness  added  to  the  previous  sum 

O'Ur  moral  and  social  ill  by  beer-houses.” 

Kev.  J.  Field,  of  Reading  Jail,  had  “ ascertained  by  investigation  that 
About  four- fifths  of  the  offences  committed  by  the  agricultural  popula>- 
lation  are  traceable  to  beer-houses.”  Rev.  W.  C.  Bishop,  of  Northamp- 
ton Jail,  testified  from  experience  that  beer-houses,  by  increasing  the 
temptation  to  drunkenness,  had  greatly  contributed  to  the  increase  of 
crime. 

The  Rev.  Lewis  Page,  of  Newcastle  Jail,  had  interrogated  each  pri- 
soner as  to  the  cause  of  incarceration,  and,  with  one  exception,  each 
stated  that  it  was  the  facility  afforded  in  beer-shops  for  the  indulgence 
of  their  drinking  propeiisities. 

Rev.  W.  B.  Hallins,  of  Devon  JaU,  said  they  cannot  be  regarded  other- 
wise than  as  positive  nurseries  of  vice  and  crime. 

Rev.  Richard  Burnett,  of  Sussex  Jail,  says:  “I  am  at  a loss  lor  wbrds 
to  express  the  amount  of  evil  everywhere  produeed  by  the  multiplica- 
tion of  these  dens  of  iniquity  and  curses  of  the  poor  ’’ 

Rev.  J.  Kingswill,  of  Peutonville  Prison,  expressed  from  experience 
a very  confident  opinion  that  beer-houses  are  so  many  nurseries  of  crime 
in  the  land  . 

Rev.  S.  Joseph,  of  Chester  Jail,  says : “Jails  must  continue  to  be  filled 
with  prisoners  unless  something  be  done  to  put  down  jerry  (beer)  shops.” 

“WIio  is  so  likely  to  know  the  truth  in  this  matter,  after  beer-house  vic- 
tims themselves,  as  a good  chaplain,  who  every  hour  ol’  his  ministerial 
life  comes  in  contact  with  a fresh  example  of  beer-house  ruin  ? The 
Rev.  John  Clay  again  says : “ In  my  report  to  the  magistrates  of  Lanca- 
slure,  presented  twenty-six  years  ago,  I was  constrained  to  declare  that 
the  great  and  dreadful  cause  of  crime  in  this  country,  the  overwhelming 
curse  which  debases  and  ruins  the  lower  class,  resides  in  the  ale-house. 
Since  then  we  have  provided  for  the  industrious  poor  the  greater  curse 
of  the  beer-shop.  For  the  drunkard  then  is  in  the'  lowest  deeps  of  a lower 
deep  still,  threatening  to  devour  him.” 

G.  F.  Drury,  Esq.,  magistrate,  Shotover  Park,  Oxon,  says : “ The  Beer 
Bill  has  done  more  to  brutalize  the  English  laborer,  and  take  him  from 
his  family  and  fireside  into  the  worst  associations,  than  almost  any  mea- 
sure that  could  have  been  devised.  It  has  furnished  victims  for  the 
jails,  the  hulks,  and  the  gallows,  and  has  frightfully  extended  the  evils 
of  pauperism  and  moral  debasement.”  The  Reverend  Chancellor  Raikes 
said  at  a public  meeting : “He  had  seen  its  (the  Beer-shop  Act)  effects 
spreading  like  a blight  all  through  the  country ; villages  which  formerly 
were  like  the  creations  of  romance — so  beautiful  were  they — had  become 
the  scene  of  every  evil.” 

Archdeacon  Garbitt  says:  “A  large  experience  tells  me  that,  where 
a neighborhood  is  visited  by  this  scourge  (beer-shops),  no  organization, 
no  zeal,  no  piety,  however  devoted,  no  personal  labors,  however  aposto- 
lic, will  avail  to  effect  any  solid  amelioration.” 

In  1853,  the  House  of  Commons  appointed  another  select  committee, 
with  a view  of  ascertaining  facts  respecting  this  growing  evil,  etc.  That 
committee,  of  which  the  Hon.  C.  ViLliers  was  chairman,  sat  for  forty-one 
day  examining  witnesses  and  considering  evidence.  In  their  report  to 
the  House,  that  committee  said,  “ The  beer-shop  system  has  proved  a 
failure,”  and  concm'red  in  the  statement  ol'  the  Lords'  report  on  the  Beer 
Act  of  1830,  that  “ it  was  aheady  sufficiently  notorious  that  drunken- 
ness is  the  main  cause  of  crime,  disorder,  and  distress  in  England,  and  it 
appears  that  the  multiplication  of  houses  for  the  consumption  of  intoxi- 
cating liquors,  which,  under  this  act,  has  risen  from  8,830  to  123,306,  haa 
been  thus  in  itself  an  evil  of  the  ffist  magnitude.”  That  this  committee 


4 


THE  EVTL8  OP  BEKE  LEOISLATIOjr. 


should  hriag  in  such  a report  was  to  be  expected  from  the  nature  of  th« 
evidence  adduced,  ■which,  on  the  part  of  magistrates,  ministor?,  prison 
chaplains,  etc.,  all  ■went  to  sho^w  that  beer- houses  ■were  “nests  of  vice 
and  pests  of  society.”  Kveii  Mr.  Buck,  M.  P.  for  Devon,  though  repre- 
senting a constituency  largely  influenced  by  liquor  dealers,  admitted 
that  the  Beer  Bill  of  1830  “ was  one  of  the  greatest  evils  that  was  ever 
inflicted  upon  the  country ; it  had  tended  greatly  to  demoralize  the  peo- 
ple, and  in  his  o-svn  neighborhood  there  was  scarcely  an  act  ol' degradation 
committed  that  did  not  originate  in  some  one  or  other  of  the  beer-houses.” 
And  Mr.  H.  Dawson,  beer  merchant,  when  before  the  committee,  said, 
“ K the  trade  were  thrown  open,  we  do  not  know  what  amount  of  police 
■we  should  reqiure,  in  fact  the  borough  fund  would  scarcely  pay  them.” 
The  testimony  of  Mr.  Clay,  chaplain  of  Preston  Prison,  was  most  damag- 
ing. “Four-fifths,”  he  says,  “ of  the  beer- houses  in  Illackburn  are  also 
brothels.”  “Nor,”  he  adds  in  his  24th  Report  to  the  House  of  Correction 
at  Preston,  while  commenting  on  this  I'act,  “is  this  the  lull  amount  of 
evil.  The  neighborhood  of  those  houses  is  corrupted.  Women,  married 
women,  occupied  to  all  appearance  with  their  own  proper  avocations  at 
home,  hold  themselves  at  the  call  of  the  beer-house  for  the  immorai  pur- 
poses to  which  I have  referred." 

The  result  of  this  enquiry  was  the  passing  of  what  is  kno^wn  as  the 
“■Wilson  Patten  Act”  in  1854,  which  required  that  public-houses  and 
beer-shops  be  closed  on  Sunday  from  half-past  two  o’clock  p.ii.  until 
nix  P.U.,  and  from  ten  o’clock  on  Sunday  evening  until  four  A.ii.  on 
Monday.  During  the  few  months  this  act  was  in  force,  there  was  a 
sensible  abatement  of  drunkenness  and  disorder,  showing  what  would 
be  the  result  were  they  kept  closed  all  the  time. 

Take  the  follo^wing  as  specimen  evidence : Mr.  S.  A.  Beckett,  Magis- 
trate of  the  Police,  Southwurk  Police  Court,  London,  in  a letter  to  the 
Times,  January  8, 1855,  says  that,  on  the  Monday  mornings  before  the  act, 
the  business  ol’  the  court  was  greater  than  any  other  days,  but  that  since, 
it  had  only  averaged  two  cases  of  drunkenness  for  each  Sunday.  The 
following  statistics  speak  for  themselves.  The  Rev.  J.  Clay,  of  Preston 
Jail,  having  exanflned  the  cases  of  committals  of  males  to  the  prison  for 
drunkenness  during  four  months  before  and  four  months  after  the  pass- 
ing of  the  act,  gives  the  result : 


COMMITTED  FOR  TRIAL. 

Four  months  before  the  passing  of  the  bill, S5 

Four  months  after  the  passing'of  the  bill, SS 

COMMITTED  SUMMARILY. 

Four  months  before  the  passing  of  the  bill, 106 

Four  months  after  the  passing  of  the  bill 07 

COMMITTED  SUMMARILY  OX  MONDAYS. 

Four  months  before  the  passing  of  the  bill,  . 3$ 

Four  months  after  the  passing  of  the  bill 17 


— a decrease  of  more  than  31  per  cent,  on  the  whole,  and  of  more  thar*  50 
per  cent,  on  the  Monday  committals.  The  returns  of  the  Dorset  Sessions 
of  the  number  of  prisoners  tried  were  as  follows : The  quarter  before  the 


passing  of  the  act : 

For  Sunday  drunkenness Ki 

For  other  crimes, 71 

After  the  passing  of  the  act : 

For  Sunday  drunkenness, B 

For  other  crimes, ..M 

In  Somerset,  quarter  before  the  passing  of  the  act : 

115  prisoners  at  the  Session*. 

70  prisoners  at  tire  Assizes. 


In  Somerset,  quarter  after  the  passing  of  the  act : 

90  prisoners  at  the  Sessions. 
66  prisoners  at  the  Aasixes. 


THE  EVILS  OP  BEER  LEGISLATIOIT.  5 

In  DeToushire,  qnartei  before  the  passing  of  the  act* 

At  Sessions  and  Assizes, lit 

In  Devonshii-e,  quarter  after  the  passing  of  the  act : 

At  Sessions  and  Assizes, S8 


JTo  wonder  that  with  such  statistics  the  Morning  Herald,  of  Jannaiy 
11,  1855,  should  say : “ Since  last  August,  when  the  act  came  into 
force,  every  fact  which  has  heen  made  public  on  the  subject  tells  in  its 
favor.”  Magistrates,  chaplains  to  prisons,  police  officers,  and  all  othfs 
persons  whose  duty  leads  them  to  observe  the  increase  or  decrease  of 
crime  eoncm-  in  the  unanimous  verdict  that  the  measure  has  proved  most 
conducive  to  the  public  morals.  All  the  evidence  which  deals  with  facta 
runs  one  way ; not  a syllable  is  uttered  against  the  bill,  except  empty 
declamation.”  Sir  George  Grey,  the  Home  Secretary,  was  informed^ by 
some  of  the  trade  (liquor  dealers)  that  the  obnoxious  act  had  diminished 
their  business  by  at  least  two-thirds  ; others  had  suffered  to  the  extent  of 
one-third;  some  had  been  seriously  injured.  “ And  this,”  remarks  the 
Secretary  most  significantly,  “ is  probably  the  general  rule.” 

These  statistics  as  to  the  modified  law,  relieving  some  of  the  hours  of 
the  Sabbath  from  the  accursed  traffic,  are  but  an  echo  of  the  statistics  of 
crime  before  and  after  the  passing  of  the  Boer  Act  in  1830.  Before  the 
passing  of  that  act,  for  a few  years  the  increase  of  crime  was  at  the  rate 
of  twelve  per  cent.  In  the  two  years  after  the  passing  of  the  act,  crime 
had  increased  at  the  rate  of  thirty-one  per  cent. 

And  to-day,  after  a forty  years’  experiment,  the  English  press  almost 
universally  proclaim  the  beer-shops  of  Great  Britain  to  be  the  greatest 
pest  in  the  laud.  Recorder  Hill,  of  Birmingham,  one  of  the  highest 
English  authorities  that  can  be  quoted  on  the  subject,  says : “The  es- 
tablishment of  the  beer-shop,  which  was  to  check  these  evils  (arising 
from  the  sale  of  distilled  liquors)  is  inoperative  to  that  end,  and  has  in- 
troduced mischief  of  its  own,  and  indeed  is  universally  denounced  as  a 
curse  upon  the  land.” 

Two  years  ago,  the  Convocation  of  Canterbury,  embracing  a territory' 
comprising  nearly  half  the  population  of  England,  appointed  a committee 
consisting  of  leading  dignitaries  of  the  church  of  England  to  enquire  into 
the  evils  of  intemperance.  That  committee  addressed  enquiries  to  large 
numbers  of  the  clergy,  magistrates,  governors,  aud  chaplains  of  prisons, 
etc.,  and  in  response  to  the  enquhy,  “ IVhat  remedial  measures  against 
intemperance  can  you  kindly  suggest  ?”  the  suppression  of  beer-shops 
Sras  named  as  one  of  the  first  things  to  be  done. 

A few  of  the  replies  I here  give : 

FROM  THE  CLERGY. 

“ The  increase  of  intemnerance  is  entirely  owing  to  the  setting  np  of  first  one, 
and  afterwards  a rival  beer-house.  I do  not  see  how  any  thoughtful  person,  who 
cares  for  the  well-being  of  the  poor,  can  feel  otherwise  than  that  the  state,  by  its 
encouragement  of  the  multiplication  of  beer-shops,  commits  a great  national  sin 
which  rhust  one  day  be  punished  by  a nitional  retribution.” 

“ The  beer-houses  are  an  unmitigated  nuisance.” 

“ The  Duke  of  Wellington’s  Beer-house  Act  was  the  origin  of  much  of  the  exiat 
big  evil.” 

” Beer-shops,  in  my  humble  opinion,  are  the  curse  of  the  country.” 

“ If  lam  asked  to  point  out  the  great  cause  and  encouragement  of  intemper 
ence,  I have  no  hesitation  in  ascribing  it  in  a great  measure  to  that  most  disastront 
Act  of  Parliament  which  set  beer-shops  on  foot.  It  has  inflicted  a terrible  curse  OB 
this  country.” 

FROM  CHIEF  CONSTABLES  AND  CHIEFS  OF  POLICE. 

“ The  low  beer-shops  are  the  great  curse  of  the  country.” 

“ I say  that  the  beer  houses  should  be  closed  altogether.  They  are  graat 
iucements  to  drunkenness.” 

“ Abslish  the  present  Beer-house  Act.” 

“ Close  every  beer-house.” 

“I  would  abolish  the  beer-house  system  altogether.” 

“ The  heer-housea  are  a frightful  source  of  Intemperance.” 


THB  BVTLS  OF  BEER  LEGISLATION, 


FEOM  GOVEKNOES  OF  WORKHOUSES. 

“ Beer-houBes  are  the  nest  of  vice  and  intemperance.” 

“I  would  most  certainly  abolish  beer-houses.  You  will,  I am  positive,  s»v« 
l/.any  young  persons  if  you  will  use  your  powerful  influence  by  striking  out  theM 
post-houses,  the  root  of  all  evil.” 

The  abolition  of  beer-houses  would  be  a boon  to  the  country.” 

“Beer-shops  should  be  totally  aboiished.” 


FEOM  JUDGES. 

Judge  Bovile  says  : “ The  beer-shops  are  the  greatest  curse  to  the  workingmen.” 
Judge  Selle  replies:  ‘The  total  suppression  of  beer  houses  throughout 
country  would  be  an  unmitigated  good.” 


THINGS  IN  AMERICA. 


'‘'Come  back  to  America/'  and  well  might  Rev.  Dr.  John  Todd, 
though  summoned  by  the  license  pa  rty  to  testify  for  them  before  the  Le- 
gislative Conrauttee  of  1867,  say  of  the  beer-drinkers  of  Pittsfield  : 

“ I wish  to  say  In  regard  to  beer,  that,  while  1 think  it  is  not  as  intoxicating  ai 
other  drinks,  it  demoralizes  awfully.  We  have  a large  population  of  fo-reigners 
with  us.  and  beer  is  their  chief  drink.  It  makes  them  beso  ted.  It  makes  them 
cross.  It  makes  their  homes  unpleasant.  It  prevents  them  from  rising  in  civil- 
ization. It  shuts  them  out  from  the  influence  of  everything  that  is  ennobling.” 

Oliver  Dyer,  with  remarkable  opportunities  for  observation  in  the 
city  of  Hew  York,  says,  in  the  January  number  of  Packard's  Monthly, 
1870: 

“Before  closing  this  article,  I wish  to  mention  what  seems  to  me  to  be  a gen- 
eral fallacy,  to  wit,  that  laser-beer  is  an  utterly  harmless  beverage,  and  that  the 
substitution  of  it  lor  whiskey  is  a great  gain.  So  far  as  my  observation,  goes  I 
am  satisfied  that  a German,  with  his  brain  soaked  to  stolidity  in  lager-beer,  is  as 
bad  a brute  as  an  Irishman  with  his  brain  set  on  lire  with  whiskey.  The  par- 
oxysm of  the  whiskey-fired  brain  is  more  violent  while  it  lasts,  but  tne  bruta  ity 
of  the  beer-soaked  brain  is  more  stolid  and  enduring.  I speak  from  personal 
knowledge,  obtained  by  visiting  hundreds  of  families  of  both  c. asses,  and  >et.  so 
confirmed  is  public  opinion  as  to  the  harmlessness  oflag-r-beer  I do  not  suppose 
that  any  one  will  accept  my  statements  as  being  even  an  approximation  to  the 
truth  ; still  I know  that  1 am  right.  It  takes  longer,  it  is  true,  and  costs  more 
money  fora  German  to  stupefy  himself  with  lager-beer  ,han  it  does  for  an  Irishman 
to  madden  himself  with  whiskey;  but  whether  that  greater  outlay  of  time  and 
money  on  the  part  of  the  Teuton  gives  him  any  advantages  t)ver  the  Celt  is  a ques- 
tion which  it  might  be  well  for  political  and  social  economists  to  consider,  remem- 
bering, also,  as  they  do  consider  it.  that  the  transition  from  beer  guzzling  to  whis- 
key drinking  is  short  and  etisy,  and  constantly  made.” 

As  to  the  result  of  beer  legislation  in  our  own  State,  you  are  so  fami- 
liar that  I need  scarcely  say  aught  on  this  point.  The  telling  statistics, 
presented  by  the  records  of  city  and  county  prison.5,  houses  of  correc- 
tion, etc.,  are  unanswerable.  A glance  at  the  last  annual  report  of  the 
Massachusetts  Temperance  Alliance  is  enough : 


“ Wq  compare  the  year  ending  September  30, 1870,  with  the  year  ending  Sep- 
tember 30,  1887,  when  cider  and  malt  liquors  came  under  the  ban  of  prohibition, 


and  the  law  was  quite  well  executed: 

Committed  to  the  City  I’rison  of  Boston  in  1867, 10,429 

Committed  to  tie  City  Prison  of  Boston  in  1870,  . . ...  . 12,863 

Under  the  modified  law,  2,4.33  more  than  under  strict  prohibition. 

Committed  to  Siiff  Ik  County  .Jail  in  1867  3.7SS 

Commirted  to  Suffolk  County  Jail  in  1810,  . . . . • • 5.269 

Under  the  modified  law.  1..526  more  than  under  strict  prohibition, 

October  1,  1867.  the  number  in  Suffolk  Jail  was, 17-3 

October  1,  1870,  the  number  in  Suffolk  .Jail  was 239 

Commitraeiiis  to  all  the  jails  in  the  State  in  1867, 5.  nO 

Commitments  to  all  the  jailo  in  the  State  in  ISTOi 7,850 

Under  the  modified  law,  2,030  more  than  under  strict  prohibition. 

Committed  to  all  the  houses  of  correction  in  the  State  in  1867,  . . . 3.829 

Committed  to  all  the  houses  of  correction  in  the  State  in  1870.  . . . 5.477 

Under  the  modified  lavr,  1.618  more  than  under  strict  prohibition. 


Number  committed  to  State  Prison  in  1867, 

Number  committed  to  State  Prison  in  1870,  . . . 

Under  the  modified  law,  49  more  than  under  strict  prohibition. 
Average  number  of  convicts  in  State  Prison  in  1867, 

Average  number  of  convicts  in  State  Prison  in  1870. 


128 

1~7 


537 

591 


An  average  of  5T  more  under  the  modified  law  than  under  strict  prohibition. 


THE  EVILS  0V  BBEE  LEGTSLATJOIT.  T 

Nnaiber  of  rfijTisrism/ persons  in  State  Prison  mI8('7, 64< 

Number  of  d^erent  persons  in  State  Prison  in  1870, 774 

Under  the  modified  law,  128  more  than  under  strict  prohibition. 

That  the  sale  of  malt  liquors  covers  the  sale  of  all  sorts  of  liquors,  no 
one  in  this  audience  doubts.  The  Chief  of  the  Boston  Police  says,  in  Ms 
last  report,  that  of  2,584  liquor-shops  in  the  city,  only  17  of  them  con- 
fine tlieir  sales  to  lager-beer ; the  sale  of  the  latter  cloaks  the  sale  of  dis- 
tilled liquors. 

When  these  facts  cannot  be  denied,  the  abominable  adulteration  ol 
the  brewer  is  made  the  scape-goat.  The  evils  of  drunkenness  are  allow- 
ed, but  they  are  attributed  to  the  base  practices  of  adulterating  the  bieer. 
Beer  brewed  from  nothing  but  malt  and  hops,  they  are  sm-o,  wiil  never 
make  people  drunk.  With  some  people  there  is  no  theme  so  popular  as 

bad.  beer,”  and  the  denunciation  of  the  brewers  and  dealers  who  supply 
it.  A word  as  to  this  prevaihng  fallacy,  and  I am  done  : In  the  manu- 
facture of  good  beer,  as  it  is  called  (I  speak  not  now  of  the  abominable 
adulterations,  though  they  are  common  enough),  three  things  are  neces- 
sary— malt,  hops,  and  water.  The  water,  though  useful,  is  not  food. 
The  hop  gives  flavor,  and  helps  to  preserve  the  liquor,  but  it  contains  no 
feeding  properties.  To  name  its  chemical  constituents  will  suffice. 
These  are  volatile  oil,  resin — a bitter  principle — tannin,  malic  acid,  ace- 
tate, hydfochlorate,  and  sulphate  of  ammonia.  The  malt,  then,  is  the 
only  substance  that  can  make  the  lif[uor  feeding,  either  as  it  remains  in 
the  liquor  or  as  it  may  be  converted  into  some  other  substance.  Malt, 
we  all  know,  is  vegetated  barley.  Barley  is  food  next  in  nutrition  to 
wheat,  and  all  we  have  to  do  is  to  ascertain  how  much  of  this  feeding- 
Bubstance  is  Ibund  in  the  beer  when  men  drink  it.  The  brewing  process 
will  give  us  that,  in  tracing  which  we  shall  find  that  at  every  step  the 
object  is  not  to  secure  a feeding  but  au  intoxicating  liquor,  and  that  to 
obtain  this  the  feeding  properties  of  the  barley  are  sacrificed  at  every 
stage. 

lu  making  a gallon  of  beer,  six  pounds  of  barley  are  used,  which,  to 
commence  with,  is  six  pounds  of  nutritious  food.  In  manufacturing 
this  into  beer,  it  has  to  undergo  four  processes,  in  every  one  of  which  it 
loses  part  of  its  nutriment.  The  first  is  malting,  or  sprouting.  By  this 
process  the  maltsters  spoil  the  barley  of  oiie-l'ourth  of  its  nutriment,  just 
m the  same  way  as  wheat  is  spoiled  if  it  gets  wet  and  sprouts  iu  the 
field.  Every  housekeeper  knows  that  when  potatoes  or  onions  sprout 
they  lose  much  oi'  their  nutritive  properties.  The  next  process  is  that  of 
mashing,  by  which  a saccharine  solution  i?  extracted  from  the  grain, 
and  here  one-thh'd  of  the  barley  is  lost.  Then  follows  the 
process,  by  which  another  fourth  of  it  is  converted  into  alcohol.  The 
fourth  process  is  that  oi  fining.  People  don’t  like  thick  or  muddy 
beer ; and  as  some  thick  matter  cannot  be  prevented  coming  over  in 
mashing,  the  liqnor  is  put  to  settle,  and  these  settlings  are  disposed  of  as 
"barrel-bottoms.”  These  bottoms  are  really  parts  of  the  barley,  and 
here  is  another  loss.  iSTow,  in  this  gallon  of  beer,  bow  much  of  the  barley 
is  there  le^t ']  At  the  outset  you  had  soma  six  pounds,  or  ninety-six 
oitnces.  What  is  there  now?  Loss  than  ten  ounces.  The  truth  of  this 
you  can  easily  ascertain.  Get  a pint  of  ale  or  beer,  and  place  it  in  a 
saucepan,  then  gently  boil  it  over  the  fire.  The  fluid  part  will  go — the 
solid  part  will  remain.  Thus  every  grain  of  solid  matter  can  be  obtain- 
ed, and  its  properties  and  amount  iully  ascertained. 

Scientific  men  have  frequently  made  the  experiment,  and,  by  careful 
tests,  demonstrated  that  the  average  quantity  of  solid  matter  found  in  a 
gallon  ol'malt  litiuor  is  less  than  ten  ounces.  So  that  in  mannfaeturing 
ale  or  beer,  you  actually  lose  very  nearly  eiglity  mvts  out  of  eighty-eight, 
and  all  that  you  obtain  in  place  of  it  is  upward  of  three  ounces  of  aioo- 
hoUc  poison,  which  constitutes  the  strength  of  the  liquor.  What  would 
you  think  of  the  man  who  should  buy  ninety-six  ounces  of  wUeat.  maaing 
it  sjarout,  drying  it,  pouring  hot  wator  upon  it,  giving  a part  to  the  pigs. 


8 


THB  EVILS  OP  BEER  LEGISLATION. 


and  tlirowing  a part  domi  the  gutter,  should  waste  upward  of  eighty 
ounces,  and  should  leave  for  himself  and  family  ;nly  ten  ounces  ? "WTiat 
if  he  did  this  for  the  purpose  of  getting  about  four  ounces  of  poison 
which  will  injure  Ms  health,  destroy  his  reason,  and  corrupt  Ms  heart  I 
Would  you  say  that  God  sent  the  grain  to  be  thus  wasted,  or  would  you 
caU  the  poison  which  the  ingenuity  of  this  prodigal  had  extracted  “a 
good  creature  of  God” '?  Much  has  been  said  of  waste  and  extravagance, 
but  we  know  of  no  instance  or  example  that  wiU  bear  any  parallel  with 
the  prodigality  that  is  practised  in  converting  barley  into  malt,  and  malt 
into  beer.  Cleopatra  is  said  to  have  dissolved  a precious  gem  in  her 
glass,  and  to  have  drunk  at  a banquet  as  a proof  of  the  little  value  she 
could  afford  to  set  upon  what  was  costly;  but  gems  are  less  valuable 
than  the  food  wMch  God  has  created  for  the  sustenance  of  hie,  and,  there- 
fore, he  who  destroys  the  precious  grain  of  the  earth,  destroys  what  is  more 
valuable  than  pearis,  and  Ms  crimmality  is  not  a little  enhanced  that  ho 
does  this  for  the  purpose  of  producmg  a poison.  What,  then,  we  ask,  is 
there  to  support  or  strengthen  a man  in  a pmt  of  ale  or  beer  ? Its  contents 
are  fourteen  ounces  of  neater,  part  of  an  ounce  of  the  extract  of  barley, 
and  nearly  an  ounce  of  alcohol.  The  water  and  alcohol  go  iuunediately 
into  the  veins,  and  while  the  alcohol  poisons,  the  water,  if  not  needed, 
unnecessarily  dilutes  the  blood,  overcharges  the  vessels,  and  loads  the 
kidneys  and  bladder,  wMle  there  remains  less  than  an  ounce  of  indigest- 
ible extract  of  malt,  wMch  has  been  grown,  roasted,  scalded,  boiled,  em- 
bittered, fermented,  and  drenched  with  water  and  alcohol,  till  it  seems 
unfit  for  the  brute,  far  less  the  human  stomach.  Yet  this  is  all  that  is 
left  in  the  stomach  to  be  digested.  Xo  wonder  that  all  beer-drinkera 
feel  a constant  pain  and  sinking  in  their  stomach,  and  that  they  are 
always  craving  for  more  drink. 

“CallMmSir  John  Badeycom.  It  is  a Ubel.  In  the  farmer’s  hands 
he  is  “ barleycorn  ” ; in  the  bi-ewer’s  hands,  a goodly  portion  of  Ms  vital 
parts  is  abstracted,  and,  after  the  malt-crusher  has  broken  every  bone  in 
Ms  body,  the  brewer,  by  scalding  water,  fimshes  his  career,  and  turns 
the  poor  KMght’s  best  blood  into  atpia  vita;,  easting  away  his  lost  re- 
mains as  “ barrel-bottoms  ” ! Poor  Sir  J ohn ! ” 

With  the  testimony  of  England’s  greatest  brewer  you  are  all  familiar. 
He  said,  “ The  struggle  of  the  school,  the  library,  and  the  church,  all 
nmted  against  the  beer-houses  and  gin-palaces,  is  but  one  development 
of  the  war  between  heaven  and  hell.”  Listen  now  to  the  testimony  of 
America’s  greatest  brewer : 

“ At  a recent  meetin"  of  a hundred  or  more  gentlemen,  late  residents  of  tha 
North  Side,  where  wide  tracts  of  the  beautiful  lake  shore  have  for  years  been  ruined 
for  homes  or  investment  by  the  great  breweries  of  that  quarter,  William  kill,  a 
citizen  of  large  wealth,  whose  thirty  years'  experience  as  a brewer  have  pla-ed  him 
confessedly  at  the  head  of  his  guild  in  the  Northwest,  was  among  the  speakers. 
The  question  being  upon  the  rebuilding  of  the  breweries,  Mr.  Llll  said  that  he 
should  never  build  nor  own  another  bretvery.  It  was  a business  that  demoralized 
both  master  and  man.  He  had  found  it  impossible  to  keep  sober  men  on  his  prem- 
ises. It  was  a manufactory' of  drunkards  in  constant  operation:  and  the  curse 
began  in  the  brewery  itself,  where  every  man  was  a beer-barrel  in  'he  morning  and 
a barrel  of  beer  at  night.  He  w'ould  have  no  more  of  it.  He  would  be  content  to 
make  less  money  in  some  other  way. 

“ At  this  point  an  old  acquaintance  in  the  audience  called  out,  ‘ kill,  what  ar« 
yre  to  do  for  that  excellent  ale  of  yours  ’ ? Mr.  Lill  answered,  ' Do  without,  and  bo 
the  better  for  it.’  * 

' ' What  wilt  the  advocates  of  beer  say  to  this  revelation  ? It  is  no  new  discov- 
ery that  the  beer  saloon  is  one  of  the  priucipit  st.ations  r.d  ticket-otlici  s on  the 
Black  Valley  foiilroad  : but  there  is  great  value  iii  this  coufirmatio  : ot  the  lact  from 
one  whose  experience  covers  twenty  years  in  a great  brewery  establishment.” 

If  the  manufacture  demoralizes  both  master  and  man,  what  will  be  th* 
result  to  the  consumer  i 


Published  bv  the  Xational  Temperance  Society  and  Pro- 
LiCATioN  House,  Xo.  58  Keade  Street,  Xew 
York,  at  $6  per  Thousand. 


103 


WHAT  IT  ALL  COSTS. 

BY  OVID  MINER, 


It  Ib  the  purpose  of  this  tract  to  present  the  yearly  cost, 
loeaos,  and  wastes  caused  by  intoxicating  liquors  to  the  mate- 
rial interests  of  tne  country.  The  figures  and  facts  following 
Me  copied  from  official  documents  issued  by  the  United  States 
Treasmy  Department,  for  the  fiscal  year  ending  June  30.  1871, 
and  from  Documents  published  by  the  New  York  Legislature, 
for  the  year  ending  September  .30,  1871.  That  these  quotations 
are  quite  v^^ithin  the  truth  there  can  be  no  reasonable  doubt  • 
and  as  to  the  substantial  correctness  of  our  inferences  and  esti- 
mates, we  mean  there  shall  be  no  ground  for  distrust : 

The  Treasmy  books  sliow  that  there  was  imported,  dur- 
ing the  L'scal  year  1871,  of  liquors,  wines,  and  cor- 


dials,   GaUs.,  13,581,303 

Of  this  there  was  exported  and  consumed  abroad,  - “ 288,734 


Leaving  for  yeaiiy  home  consumption,  - - Galls.,  13,292,563 

The  retail  cost  of  this,  at  10  cents  a glass,  or  $6  per  gal- 
lon, would  amount  to $79,755,408 

Domestic  liquors  were  distilled,  during  same  period,  to 

the  amount  of  Galls.,  62,300,000 

Exported  and  consumed  abroad,  - - - - “ 780,153 


Leaving  for  home  consumption,  ....  Galls.,  61,519,847 
Retail  cost  of  this,  at  $6  per  gallon,  ....  $369,119,083 

Of  fermented  liquors  (one-third  of  which  was  brewed  in 

New  York),  there  were, Bbls.,  7,000,000 

Retail  cost,  at  10  cents  a pint,  or  $24  a barrel,  would 

amount  to $168,000,000 

Revenue  officers  believe  that  10  per  cent,  of  all  liquors,  im- 
ported and  home-made  (in  some  sections  of  the  country  a larger 
percentage),  are  smuggled  or  concealed  so  as  to  escape  taxa- 
tion. To  give  the  whole  amount  of  national  dram-drinking,  this 
should  be  added  to  the  enormous  aggregates  above ; but  we  set  off 
unknown  quantity  against  what  may,  perhaps,  be  used  in  arts 
and  as  medicines.  The  direct  yearly  cost,  therefore,  to  the  people 
of  this  country,  for  intoxicating  beverages,  may  be  stated  thus . 

ITor  Imported  Liquors,  - - . ...  $79,695,408 

" Domestic  Distilled, 369,119,082 

“ Renaented.  ........  168,000,000 


|6l6>8i4.49a 


8 


"WHAT  IT  AI>L  COSTS. 


The  State  of  New  York,  with  one-ninth  the  population  of  the 
Republic,  probably  consumes  a seventh  part  of  tliis  ocean  of 
fiery  drink ; thus  bearing  an  annual  hquor  tax  oi eighty  millions 
of  dollars. 

And  this  is  not  all.  There  are  in  the  States  140.000  licensed 
retailers  (21,300  behig  in  New  York),  21  ,.500  wholesale  dealers, 
and  no  doubt  many  more  beer  saloons  (fc2,5C0)  than  sufficient  to 
swell  the  whole  number  of  national  dram-shops  to  250,000.  Sup- 
posing each  of  these  establishments  to  require  one  assistant  or 
eierk  only,  we  have  an  army  of  500,000  able-bodied  persona 
withdrawn  fi-om  productive  or  useful  industries,  and  becoming 
at  once  the  tempters  and  tempted  to  idleness,  dissipation,  pro- 
fanity and  gaming.  If  the  annual  subsistence  of  this  great  army 
were  assumed  to  cost  $500  each,  or  if  their  probable  earnings 
were  estimated  at  so  small  a sum,  then  the  country  loses  of  ita 
industrial  forces  and  products,  through  liquor  traffic,  at  least 
$250,000,000. 

Destruction  of  grain,  fruit,  molasses,  etc.,  made  into  alcohol, 
with  costs  of  manufacture,  mav  be  set  down,  at  the  least,  as 
$50,000,000. 

Careful  statisticians  have  shown  ample  reasons  for  the  belief 
that  there  are  nearly  a million  of  drankards — the  habitually  in- 
temperate— in  this  country.  Estimating,  now,  the  number  at 
750,000,  their  wages  at  i?2  per  day,  that  they  waste  but  half 
their  time  by  hai  d drinking,  and  the  country  hereby  sustains 
an  additional  loss  of  6225,000,000. 

In  the  Cfty-sLx  County  I^oor-Ilouses  of  New  York,  the  six  City 
Almshouses,  the  hundred  and  three  Orjrhan  Asylums,  and  the 
seven  Institutions  for  Juvenile  Delinquents,  there  were  last  yea» 
80,204  paiqiers,  helpless  children,  and  vagrants;  and  in  additioa 
(01,700  were  temporarily  relieved  by  the  public.  The  large 
numbers  of  needy  and  outcasts  relieved  by  private  and  Christian 
rbnritics  in  the  State  are  not  here  taken  into  account ; but  no 
doubt  three-fourths  of  the  whole  became  burdens  through  their 
own  or  parenhs'  intemperance. 

The  Criminal  Statistics  of  New  York  srive  the  wlio'.e  nnm1>er 
of  convictions  by  Comts  of  Records,  in  the  several  counties,  for 
the  year,  as  2.151  ; convictions  by  (jourts  of  Special  Sessions  in 
the  counties.  21.35 1 , and  convictions  by  Courts  of  Special  Sessions 
in  tbo  twenty  large  cities,  5d,5S3  ; making  74,030  criminals  of  all 
grades.  Tnree-fourths  of  these  we  assume  to  have  been  led 
hito  crime  by  strong  drink.* 

• Such  IS  the  unhorm  ti'stimony  of  judges,  sheriffs,  and  overseers  of 
•poor.  About  the  year  1840,  thorough  examination  of  State  prisons. 
Jails,  and  pauper  institutions  in  the  State  was  made  by  the  late  Samnei 
Chipman.  Of  8,434  public  paupers  whose  individual  history  was  learned, 
1,1.5S  professed  to  have  been  tempera^  ; 1,402  were  of  doubtful  charaetei 
a.s  to  sobriety,  or  nnloiown : and  5,874  had  been  intemperate.  Of  5, 033 
conimitmeuts  to  jaiJ.s,  041  were  temperate,  1,003  unknown,  3,3S8  intern 
perate. 


■WHAT  IT  ALL  COSTS. 


s 


In  respect  to  the  above  two  items,  it  is  fair  to  observe  that 
New  York  suffers  by  comparison  with  sister  States  on  account 
of  the  multitudes  of  vagabonds  and  felons  continually  cast  upon 
her  territory  from  the  Old  World.  Estimating  the  paujjierism 
and  crime  in  New  York  as  one-sixth  (16  per  cent.)  of  aU  in  the 
Union,  though  the  State  contains  but  one-ninth  (11  per  cent.)  of 
the  whole  population,  we  must  conclude  that  intemperance  bur- 
dens the  Eepublic  with  at  least  800,000  public  paupers,  costing 
yearly  $100,000,000. 

And  that  an  army  of  300,000  rioters,  thieves,  burglars,  and 
murderers,  are  recruited  in  dram-shops,  and  sent  forth  to  prey 
upon  the  people  at  an  annual  cost  of  unknown  millions. 

As  near  as  can  be  ascertained  from  inquiries  made  and  mak- 
ing by  the  State  Board  of  Charities,  there  are  10,000  insane 
persons  in  New  York,  and  not  less  than  6,000  idiots.  High  me- 
dical authority  instructs  us  that  one-third  of  all  this  misery 
comes  from  strong  drink.*  How  great  an  army  of  drunken  ma- 
niacs and  imbeciles  are  to  be  found  in  the  whole  Union,  can  only 
be  conjectui-ed ; but  they  must  be  numbered  by  tens  of  thou- 
sands. 

Let  the  details  of  our  argument  be  now  summed  up  thus : 


1 The  yearly  retail  cost  of  liquors,  ....  $616,814,490 

2.  Labor  wages,  or  value  of  time,  of  dealers  and  their 

clerks, 250,000,000 

3.  Waste  of  grain,  fruits,  etc.,  with  cost  of  manufactur- 

ing alcohol,  .......  50.000,000  - 

4.  Losses  of  productive  industry  to  the  country  of 

drunkards  and  tipplers,  - . . . . 225,000,000 

5.  Support  of  800,000  drunken  paupers  and  children,  - 100,000,000 

6.  Expenses  for  intemperate  sick,  nursing,  physicians’ 

bills,  and  funeral  charges  of  60,000  drunkards 

dying  annually, Unknown  millions. 

7.  Whole  expense  caused  by  300,000  intemperate 

criminals,  - UnKnown. 

8.  Costs  of  some  30,000  maniacs  and  idiots,  - • Unknown, 

9.  Value  of  aU  the  domestic  suffering,  pains,  shame, 

and  agony  caused  by  liquor,  - - Beyond  estimate. 

10.  Value  of  100,000  American  youth  (12,000  of  them 
from  New  York)  corrupted,  brutalized,  made 
fiends  by  drink  every  year,  - - Elnowu  only  in  Eternity. 


The  material  wastes  and  all-consuming  mischief  to  the  entire 

* Scientific  men  agree  that  alcohol  is  a cerebral  poison  that ; when 
taken  into  the  stomach  it  is  driven  through  the  blood-vessels,  chiefly 
upon  the  brain  and  nervous  centres,  causing  inflammatory  action,  im- 
poverished nutrition,  and  abnormal  state  of  mind.  It  so  weakens  and 
deranges,  that  incipient  and  prolonged  mania  can  but  often  result.  Be- 
sides, “ it  is  remarkable  that  all  diseases  arising  from  intoxicating  drinks 
•re  liable  to  become  hereditary  to  the  third  generation,  increasing,  if  the 
be  continued,  till  the  family  becomes  extinct.”  A recent  Massa- 
chusetts Legislative  Report  states  that  the  habits  of  parents  of  300  idiot* 
In  their  public  institutions  were  learned,  and  145,  almost  half  of  them, 
Were  ascertained  to  have  been  drunkards. 


4 


WHAT  rr  AIL  COSTS. 


Bountiy  of  the  liquor  traffic  and  dram-drinking — whei:  expresaei 
In  a single  aggregate — are  absolutely  appalling.  And  aU  this  ia 
without  compensating  benefits  to  any  permanent  interest.  Tffie 
whol^cost  of  State  Civil  G-overnment  in  New  York  is  seventeen 
millions  of  dollars  annually ; direct  liquor  tax  upon  the  same 
Mople,  for  the  same  time,  greatly  more  than  eighty  millions. 
United  States  revenues,  including  the  heavy  burdens  for  war 
debt,  are  four  hundred  millions  a year  j while  costs  and  result- 
ing desolations  from  intoxicating  liquors  are  immensely  mor* 
than  TWELVE  HUNDRED  MILLIONS  OF  DOLLARS  AN- 
NUALLY ! 

It  is  plain  enough  that  this  tremendous  drain  upon  the  nation's 
increase  and  substance,  and  the  deepening  degradation,  year  by 
year,  of  our  industrial  strength,  cannot  long  continue  without 
fatally  undermining  prosperity,  the  public  credit,  and  political 
freedom.  Measurably,  the  Government  is  already  passing  under 
the  control  of  two  hundred  thousand  liquor  dealers  and  their 
besotted  customers.  Numbers  of  chief  cities  have  been,  and 
still  are,  held  in  what  is  little  better  than  a state  of  siege  by  the 
rum  power.  State  and  city  elections — not  a few — are  conspiracies 
against  the  Republic,  made  possible  by  strong  drink.  Different 
departments  of  national  and  municipal  authority  have  become 
foul  with  dishonor  through  intemperate  and  debauched  officials. 

Not  unhke  the  ancient  fabled  Laocoon,  our  country  is  in  the 
constricting  coils  of  the  mighty  serpent  of  the  still,  and  we  must 
bruise  its  head,  or  it  will  loll  us  and  our  children.  Surely,  it  is 
time  for  all  men  to  see  that  licensing  a traffic  so  disastrous  and 
deadly  as  dram-selling  is  monstrous  absurdity  in  legislation. 
This  whole  business  is  sin  before  God  and  high  crime  against 
the  State.  As  well  might  Excise  Boards  inti'oduce  among  their 
neighbors  the  Asiatic  cholera  or  license  open  dens  of  rattlesnakes 
among  children. 

Does  the  reader  say,  Nothing  effective  can  he  done  to  re- 
move this  great  evil  ” f That  is  a mistake,  it  is  in  the  power 
of  the  Christian  church,  or  of  a moiety  even  of  the  sober  and 
moral  outside  of  it,  to  shield  our  youth  from  intemperance,  and 
to  dry  up  a great  share  of  the  overshadowing  curse.  F or  this 
has  been  done.  Two-thirds  of  the  liquor-drinking  has  been 
banished  from  large  sections  of  Maine,  Massachusetts,  and  Ver- 
mont ; from  single  counties  and  towns  in  New  York,  Ohio,  Michi- 
gan, Iowa,  etc.  Besides,  organized  reform  has  gained  much 
practical  wisdom  through  the  alternations  of  triumph  and  defeat 
fa  the  recent  past.  What  has  been  locally  or  temporarily  won 
to  sobriety  can  now,  by  the  divine  blessing  upon  self-denying, 
elioady  efforts,  be  more  widely  and  permanently  achieved. 

May  God  help  us  before  it  shah  be  too  late ; 

Published  bt  the  National  Teuperanue  Society  and  Pit*.' 

LIGATION  House,  No.  58  Reade  Street,  New 
York,  at  $3  per  'I'kousand. 


No.  108. 


PEACTICAl  TTORnNGS  OF  PROniBITION. 


BY  ROBERT  C.  PITMAN, 
Judge  of  Superior  Court,  Mast. 


consideriDg  the  problem  of  the  legal  prohibition  ol 
the  common  traffic  in  liquors,  various  questions  arise; 
some  of  these  are  ethical  and  political,  and  such  ques- 
tions are  rarely  susceptible  of  answers  absolutely 
demonstrative.  We  may  think  the  weight  of  argument  hea- 
vily upon  our  side;  but  still,  able  and  ingenious  men  may  con- 
tinue to  offer  plausible  suggestions  on  the  other.  But  there  are 
certain  practical  questions  to  which  experience  can  give  positive 
and  indisputable  answers.  Happily,  these  are,  to  the  mass  of 
mankind,  the  most  important.  The  theoretical  objections  to  pro- 
hibition, however  subtly  and  even  eloquently  put  by  such  writers 
as  John  Stuart  Mill,  are  satisfactorily  laid  aside  by  the  common 
sense  of  “ the  pi&ri  people,”  as  Mr.  Lincoln  used  to  call  them. 
And,  indeed,  the  legislation  of  England  and  America  on  the 
liquor  traffic  for  centuries  has  tacitly  assumed  both  the  right  and 
the  duty  of  government  io  prohibit  that  traffic  so  far  as  the  public 
good  required.  Every  license  rests  upon  the  logical  basis  of  anta- 
cedent  general  prohibition,  and  derives  its  only  pecuniary  value 
therefrom. 


9 


PRACTICAL  WORKINGS  OP  PKOniBITION. 


The  open  question  before  the  mind  of  the  conscientious  Ameri* 
can  citizen  is,  then,  Will  prohibition  diminish  the  conceded  evil 
of  intemperance  ? 

To  the  record  the  prohibitionist  fearlessly  appeals.  Yet,  because 
the  experiment  of  enforced  prohibition  has  been  tried  in  compara- 
tively few  localities  and  for  comparatively  short  periods,  much 
remains  to  be  done  to  bring  the  demonstrated  results  to  the  general 
attention  of  the  public. 

It  is  the  sole  object  of  this  paper  to  call  attention  to  the  experi- 
ence of  a single  city  and  the  lessons  suggested  thereby.  It  is  of 
my  own  city ; and  I know  well  the  sources  from  which  the  facts 
are  drawn,  and  can  commend  them  to  the  full  confidence  of  all. 
I do  not  suppose  our  case  exceptional.  But  sometimes  a single 
experiment,  carefully  performed  and  critically  watched,  does  more 
to  effectively  impress  a scientific  truth  than  wider  but  less  exact 
observations.  It  is  possible,  therefore,  that  valuable  impressions 
may  be  gained  from  a consideration  of  the  different  phases  of  the 
problem  of  prohibition  as  wrought  out  in  New  Bedford. 

THE  CASE  STATED. 

The  city  of  New  Bedford  is  a maritime  city  on  the  southeastern 
coast  of  Massachusetts,  whose  population  has  averaged  about 
21,000  for  the  last  seven  years,  and  is  now  probably  some  23,000, 
Its  business  since  the  decline  of  whaling  has  been  gradually  diver 
aifying  itself,  and  is  now  largely  manufactui  jng,  though  not  pre 
dominatingly  so.  The  law  of  Massachusetts  was  made  nominally 
that  of  prohibition  in  1852,  with  gratifying  resu’ts  in  the  country 
towns,  but  in  the  cities  with  diverse  degrees  of  enforcement. 
Thus  it  came  to  pass  that  a committee  of  the  Legislature,  in  1865, 
reported  (Senate  Doc.,  No.  200) ; “ Liquor  is  sold  openly  in  New 
Bedford,  but  not  in  front  shops — the  bars  are  generally  in  the  back 


PRACTICAL  WORKINGS  OP  PROHIBITION. 


8 


rooms.  From  an  actual  count,  there  appear  to  be  138  places.* 
That  year  the  State  constabulary  was  established  to  remedy  the 
remissness  of  municipal  authorities.  In  1867,  the  city  marshal 
testified  before  a legislative  committee  that  there  “were  no  places 
there  where  liquor  is  sold  in  public,  but  a great  many  places  where 
it  is  sold  privately.” 

The  friends  of  prohibition  in  our  city  struggled  for  several  yearr 
persistently  and  vigorously  to  elect  a city  government  which 
should  place  the  police  in  active  sympathy  with  the  State  consta- 
bulary in  the  work  of  suppressing  the  traffic.  At  length,  in  Decem- 
ber, 1869,  their  efforts  were  crowned  with  success,  and  the  Hon. 
George  B.  Eichmond  was  chosen  Mayor  upon  this  issue,  and  in  his 
inaugural,  January,  1870,  announced  his  purpose  to  execute  the 
law  thoroughly  and  impartially.  During  the  years  of  our  muni- 
cipal struggle,  the  policy  of  the  State  itself  had  fluctuated.  The 
election  in  the  fall  of  1867  had  gone  for  the  party  of  license,  and, 
ttntil  the  enactment  of  a new  law  the  following  spring,  there  was 
little  activity  in  the  enforcement  of  any.  By  the  next  fall  a reac- 
tion against  license  set  in,  and  a Legislature  was  elected  which 
restored  the  old  law  of  prohibition  (with  some  modification  of  the 
cider  clause).  This  took  effect  July  1,  1869. 

In  July  of  1870,  a fatal  modification  took  effect  which  opened 
beer-shops  throughout  the  State  wherever  the  people  of  the  muni- 
cipality so  voted  on  the  September  following,  and  thereafter  pro- 
vided for  an  annual  vote.  New  Bedford,  however,  continued  to 
forbid  the  sale  of  malt  liquors  until  her  vote  of  May,  1872 ; and  Mr. 
Eichmond  was  re-elected  Mayor  on  a stringent  prohibitory  platform 
for  the  years  1871  and  1872,  making  in  all  a term  of  three  years 
service. 

With  these  data  kept  in  view,  we  are  prepared  to  appreciate  ttw 
tmariug  of  the  statistics  now  to  be  given. 


4 


PRACTICAL  WORKINGS  OP  PROHIBrnON. 


EKSiniTS. 

The  whole  number  of  criminal  prosecutions  before  the  police 
court  for  all  offences,  and  the  number  for  drunkenness  during  the 
two  years  before  Mayor  Richmond’s  administration,  was  as  fol- 
lows, viz. : 


1868.  Wholo  number * 493 

Drunkenness 298 

1869.  Whole  number 603 

Drunkenness 292 

And  the  two  years  following : 

1870.  Whole  number 485 

Drunkenness 181 

1871.  Whole  number 462 

Drunkenness 183 


•—exhibiting  a decrease  of  about  37  per  cent,  in  the  cases  of  drunken- 
ness. It  may  be  added  that,  while  the  cases  of  drunkenness  fell 
from  292  in  1869  to  181  in  1870,  the  prosecutions  for  violation  of 
the  liquor  law  rose  from  71.  to  140. 

The  number  of  “ lodgers  ” at  the  station-house  also  fell  from  565 
In  1869  to  348  in  1871. 

Now  mark  the  contrast  after  eight  months  of  free  beer: 


1872.  Whole  number  of  cases 779 

Drunkenness 415 


--and  the  number  of  lodgers  rose  to  434,  thus  exhibiting  an  increase 
of  over  68  per  cent,  in  the  aggregate  number  of  ' crimes,  and  over 
120  per  cent,  in  cases  of  drunkenness. 

The  records  of  commitments  to  penal  institutions  exhibit  simi- 
lar results. 

House  of  Correction. 


Humber  of  commitments  from  New  Bedford  in  1869  was 189 

• « “ “ 1870  was 101 

M o « « 1871  was 93 

« « “ M 1872  was 130 


PRACTICAL  WORKINGS  OP  PROHIBITION. 


5 


WorTc-House. 

ffumber  of  commitments  from  New  Bedford  in  1869  was 81 

“ “ “ “ 1870  was 40 

“ “ “ “ 1871  was 37 

' « “ “ “ 1872  was 69 


In  order  to  give  full  weight  to  the  statistics  of  cases  brought 
before  the  police  court,  it  is  necessary  to  enquire  whether  there 
has  been  a substantially  uniform  course  of  procedure  in  regard  to 
offendsrs  on  the  part  of  the  police.  A sinister  change  of  policy 
here  may  be  made  to  distort  returns  iuto  any  shape  desired.  Thus 
it  is  well  known  to  those  familiar  with  police  matters  that  there  is 
a large  class  of  vagrants,  mendicants,  and  semi-intoxicated  persons 
who  receive  temporary  shelter  and  food  at  the  station-houses,  and 
are  termed  “ lodgers.”  It  is  not  difficult  to  make  drunkards  out 
of  a portion  of  the  lodgers,  or  lodgers  out  of  drunkards ; and  from 
sudden  and  wholly  unexplained  changes  in  the  police  reports  of 
one  of  our  largest  cities,  in  the  relative  number  of  these  from  one 
year  to  the  next  it  was  obviously  due  to  a change  of  policy.  I 
have  therefore  taken  pains,  by  private  conversation  and  from  written 
testimony,  to  satisfy  myself  that  there  has  been  no  manufacturing 
of  statistics.  Those  who  know  our  city  marshal  for  the  last  three 
years,  a man  who  brought  to  the  place  a lifelong  reputation  for 
probity  and  straightforward  manliness  of  character,  and  will  carry 
it  away  unsullied,  will  need  nothing  beyond  his  assurance  that 
there  has  been  no  change  of  orders  in  regard  to  arrests.  I have 
also  before  me  the  statement  of  the  justice  of  the  police  court  that 
the  large  diminution  of  cases  in  1870  and  1871  “ was  not,  in  my 
judgment,  owing  to  any  increased  laxity  on  the  part  of  the  officers 
in  arresting  offenders  and  bringing  them  befoi’e  the  court  for  pun- 
ishment, but  was  wholly  attributable  to  the  suppression  of  the 
sources  of  crime  consequent  upon  the  rigorous  enforcement  of  the 


6 


PEACTICAX  WORKINGS  OP  PROHIBITION. 


prohibitory  law.”  And  in  alluding  to  the  sad  change  consequent 
upon  the  beer  vote,  he  says  : “And  this,  so  far  as  my  observation 
extended,  was  not  in  consequence  of  any  efforts  on  the  part  of  the 
prosecuting  officers  to  exaggerate  the  effects  of  the  change,  as  at 
the  same  time  the  number  of  those  detained  as  ‘lodgers’  was 
increased,  most  of  whom  might  have  been  prosecuted  and  brought 
before  the  court  if  it  had  been  designed  to  make  as  large  an  exhi- 
hibition  of  prosecutions  as  possible.”  We  may,  I believe,  confi- 
dently rely  on  the  figures  I have  given  above  as  true  indices  of  the 
fall  and  rise  of  crime  and  intemperance  in  our  community. 

MORAL  CONTRASTS. 

Of  the  figures  of  hops  given  in  the  above  tables.  Mayor  Rich- 
mond, in  his  inaugural  of  1873,  well  said  : “ These  figures,  signifi- 
cant and  gratifying  as  they  are,  do  not  reveal  all  that  has  been 
aceomplished.  No  arithmetic  can  compute  the  value  of  the  hap- 
piness which  the  enforcement  of  the  law  has  effected  in  households; 
it  cannot  measure  the  woe  of  a disconsolate  wife  or  her  bliss  at  the 
reform  of  her  husband.  Encouraged  by  such  results,  and  with  full 
faith  in  the  wisdom  and  beneficence  of  the  prohibitory  statute,  I 
shall  spare  no  effort  for  its  impartial  and  rigid  enforcement.”  But 
in  his  valedictory  of  the  same  year,  he  has  to  say:  “ It  will  be 
remembered  that  on  the  first  Tuesday  of  May  last  our  city  voted 
to  allow  the  sale  of  ale  and  beer.  The  result  has  proved  that  the 
legalizing  the  ale  and  beer  shop  has  been  a curse  to  our  city,  and 
carried  misery  to  hundreds  of  homes  in  our  midst.  They  are 
nothing  but  shields  to  cover  the  stealthy  sales  of  all  intoxicating 
drinks,  and  are  .almost  a thorough  protection  of  the  rumseller 
against  the  enforcement  of  the  prohibitory  law.” 

The  judge  of  the  police  court  says : “ The  increase  of  crime  and 
disorder  consequent  upon  the  beer  vote  was  so  marked  as  to  attract 


PRACTICAL  WORKINGS  OP  PROHIBITION. 


7 


the  attention  of  all  whose  business  or  associations  brought  them 
in  contact  with  the  people.” 

The  city  missionary,  in  the  summer  of  1870,  wrote  : “ The  half 
cannot  be  told  of  the  good  resulting  from  the  execution  of  the 
prohibitory  law  in  New  Bedford,  not  only  in  the  vast  amount  of 
destitution  it  removes  (for  I stated  in  my  last  report  that  I had 
not  known  for  the  past  seventeen  years  so  little  destitution  in  the 
winter  season  arising  from  intemperance  as  during  the  past  winter), 
but  also  in  the  peace  and  happiness  it  has  brought  to  the  families 
[ have  frequently  visited,  affording  me  an  opportunity  of  noticing 
the  blessed  change.” 

In  the  summer  after  the  beer  vote,  the  same  missionary  writes : 
“ The  passage  of  the  beer  vote  has  proved  very  disastrous  to  many 
members  of  the  temperance  societies,  some  of  whom,  after  remain- 
ing true  to  their  pledges  for  several  years,  have  been  overpowered 
by  the  odors  from  the  numerous  drinking-places  they  have  daily 
to  pass.  I deeply  lament  so  many  of  our  youth  are  being  educated 
to  fill  the  ranks  of  the  drunkard.” 

CONCLUSIONS. 

“ History  is  philosophy  teaching  by  example.”  We  have  been 
reviewing  a very  brief  portion  ; but  its  lessons  are  very  clear  and 
impressive.  The  first  two  conclusions  to  be  drawn  cannot  be  bet- 
ter stated  than  in  the  words  of  the  judge  of  our  police  court : 

First.  “ It  has  been  fully  demonstrated  that  the  prohibitory 
law  can  be  enforced  to  the  same  extent  as  other  criminal  laws.” 

Recond.  “ That  such  enforcement  would  be  productive  of  the 
diminution  of  crime  in  general,  and  the  promotion  of  peace  and 
good  order  in  our  communities.” 

Third.  That  this  can  be  effected  by  electing  men  to  do  it,  and  in 
no  other  way. 


8 


PBACnCAL  WORKINGS  OP  PROHIBITION. 


Fourth.  That  to  allow  the  sale  of  malt  liquors  is  a complete 
surrender  of  the  battle,  and  opens  the  door  to  all  the  evils  of  a 
free  liquor  traffic. 

PROHIBITION  CONSTITUTIONAL. 

The  following  extracts  are  from  the  records  of  the  Supreme 
Court ; 

Chief  Justice  Taney  said:  “If  any  State  deems  the  retail  and  internal  traf- 
fic in  ardent  spirits  injurious  to  its  citizens,  and  calculated  to  produce  idleness, 
Tice,  or  debauchery,  I see  nothing  in  tne  Constitution  of  the  TTnitei  States  to 
prevent  it  from  regulating  or  restraining  the  trafBc,  or  from  prohibiting  it 
altogether,  if  it  thinks  proper.” — [5  Howard,  577.] 

Hon.  Justice  McLean  said : “ A license  to  seU  is  a matter  of  police  and 
revenue,  within  the  power  of  the  State.” — [5  Ibid.,  589.]  “ If  the  foreign  article 
be  injurious  to  the  health  and  morals  of  the  community,  a State  may  prohibit 
the  sale  of  it.” — [Ibid.,  595.]  A gain  he  says : “ No  one  can  claim  a license  to 
retail  spirits  as  amatter  of  right.” — [Ibid.,  596.] 

Hon.  Justice  Carton  said:  “If  the  State  has  the  power  of  restraint  by  li- 
cense to  any  extent,  she  may  go  to  the  length  of  prohibiting  sales  altogether.’ 
—[5  Ibid.,  611.] 

Hon.  Justice  Daniels  said  of  imports,  when  cleared  of  all  duty  and  subject 
to  the  owner:  “They  are  like  all  other  property  of  the  citizens,  and  should  be 
equally  the  subjects  of  domestic  regulation  and  taxation,  whether  owned  by 
an  importer  or  his  vendor.” — [5  Ibid.,  614.] 

In  reply  to  the  argument  that  the  importer  purchases  the  right  to  sell  when 
he  pays  duties  to  the  Government,  the  Judge  says:  “No  such  right  as  the  one 
supposed  is  purchased  by  the  importer.  He  has  not  purchased,  and  cannot 
purchase  from  the  Government,  that  which  could  not  ensure  him  a sale  inde- 
pendent of  the  law  and  policy  of  the  States.” — [Ibid.,  617.] 

Hon.  Justice  Grier  said : " It  is  not  necessary  to  array  the  appalling  statis- 
tics of  misery,  pauperism,  and  crime  which  have  their  origin  in  the  use  and 
abuse  of  ardent  spirits.  The  police  power,  which  is  exclusively  in  the  State, 
is  competent  to  the  correction  of  these  great  evils,  and  all  measures  of  re- 
straint or  prohibition  necessary  to  effect  that  purpose  are  within  the  scope  ol 
that  authority,  and  if  a loss  of  revenue  should  accrue  to  the  United  States 
from  a diminished  consumption  of  ardent  spirits,  she  will  be  a gainer  a thou- 
sand-fold in  the  health,  wealth,  and  happiness  of  the  people.” — [Ibid.,  539.] 


Published  by  the  Nation.vl  Temper.ance  Society  .and  Pub- 
lication Hocee  No.  58  Reade  Street,  New 
York,  at  $6  per  Thousand. 


No.  117, 


NATIONAL  LEGISLATION. 

BY  A.  M.  POWELL. 

The  suppression  of  tho  traffic  in  intoxicating  liquors  as  a beverago  is  an 
issue  second  to  none  other  in  importance  as  involving  thcwiational  welfare. 
Hitherto,  in  connection  with  legislation,  it  has  been  considered  mainly  as  a 
State  or  local  interest.  The  time  has  arrived  when  it  should  also  bo  treated 
as  a national  question. 

THE  NATIONAL  GOVEENMENT — ITS  JUEISDICTION. 

The  National  Government  has  always  assumed  jurisdiction  over  the  liquor 
traffic.  It  has  tolerated,  if  not  encouraged,  the  manufacture,  importation, 
and  sale  of  alcoholic  liquors,  and  exacted  a revenue  therefrom.  Tho  precise 
limits  of  this  jurisdiction  in  tho  several  States,  as  a matter  of  constitutional 
relationship,  need  not  hero  bo  argued.  In  tho  District  of  Columbia,  ^n  the 
nine  Territories  on  our  Western  frontier,  and  also  over  the  foreign  importa- 
tion of  alcoholic  liquors,  no  one  will  deny  that  it  is  absolute  and  entire. 

THE  DISTEICT  OF  COLUMBIA. 

In  the  District  of  Columbia,  in  187:1,  there  were  1,150  places  where  intoxi- 
cating liquors  were  sold,  which  paid  tribute  to  the  Government  for  the  privi- 
lege of  carrying  on  tho  crime-generating  traffic.  Added  to  these  are  unli- 
censed places  where  liquors  are  vended,  which,  it  is  estimated,  make  an  ag- 
gregate of  somewhat  over  2,000.  The  population  of  tho  District  of  Columbia, 
is  131,700,  and  of  licensed  liquor  dealers  there  is  one  for  114  of  the  inhabi- 
tants. In  1872,  during  the  fiscal  year,  there  were  in  the  District  of  Columbia 
15  licensed  manufacturers  of  fermented  liquors,  who  paid  to  the  treasury  of 
tho  National  Government  for  tho  year  an  aggregate  of  $16,006  CO ; while,  dur- 
ing the  same  time,  the  dealers,  wholesale  and  retail,  in  distilled  spirits  paid  a 
tribute  to  tho  National  Treasury,  in  tho  aggregate,  of  $38,416  42.  Tho  total 
amount  of  revenue  to  the  National  Government  from  tho  District  liquor  traf- 
fic, under  its  immediate  jurisdiction,  and  carried  on  with  its  sanction  and 
protection,  for  tho  year  was  $54,423  11.  Murder  and  other  crimes,  pauper- 
ism, and  social  vice,  which  invariably  attend  the  sale  of  alcoholic  liquor  as  a 
beverage  elsewhere,  are  also  its  unhappy  fruition  in  tho  nation’s  capital. 

It  is  pertinent  to  enquire.  Whose  grog-shops  are  those  ? Whose  tho  respou- 
sibility  for  their  continuance  or  suppression  1 The  answer,  in  the  last  analy- 
sis, will  bo  found  to  bo:  every  citizen  of  the  United  States.  Citizenship  in 
this  country  is  of  a twofold  character.  State  and  National.  Bach  confers  its 
benefits;  each  has  attendant  responsibilities.  Through  the  medium  of  his 
citizenship  under  tho  Government  of  the  United  States,  every  citizen  is  as 
directly  responsible  for  the  licensing  or  the  suppression  of  the  grog-shops  of 
the  District  of  Columbia  as  for  those  of  tho  State  to  which  ho  belongs. 


2 


I^ATIONAL  LEGISLATION". 


TILE  TEEEITOEIES. 

Tho  Territories,  as  well  as  the  District  of  Columbia,  are  under  tbe  immedi- 
ate jurisdiction  of  the  National  Government,  and,  therefore,  sustain  the  same 
relation  to  its  citizens  in  all  parts  of  the  country.  They  are  nine  in  number — 
Wyoming,  Washington,  Utah,  New  Mexico,  Montana,  Idaho,  Dakota,  Colo- 
rado, and  Arizona — and  cover  an  area  of  country  larger  in  extent  than  the  origi- 
nal thirteen  States.  In  the  absence  of  the  requisite  number  of  inhabitants, 
they  are  not  yet  in  the  condition  of  self-government.  They  may  and  should 
be  preserved  intact  from  the  grog-shop  system.  As  Congress  would  guard 
these  Territories  against  the  introduction  of  the  cattle-plague  or  anythiug  of  a 
kindred  character  prejudicial  to  their  material  interests,  so  it  should  interdict 
the  manufacture,  importation,  and  sale  therein  of  intoxicating  liquors  for 
drinking  purposes  As  an  excellent  precedent,  I quote  "with  pleasure  the 
ofBcial  announcement  of  the  conditions  of  sale  and  purchase  recently  applied 
to  a portion  of  the  Omaha  Indian  Eeservation,  authorized  by  act  of  Congress, 
as  follows:  "‘And  in  all  patents  of  land  sold  under  the  act  above  referred  to, 
THEBE  "WILL  BE  INSEETED  A CLAUSE  FOE  EVEE  PBOHIBITUrG  THE  SALE  OF 
INTOXICATING  LIQUOES  ON  SAID  LANDS,  UNDEE  PENALTT  OF  FOBFEITUEE  OF 
TITLE  THEEETO.” 

In  Colorado  alone,  in  1872,  there  were  thirty-six  manufacturers  of  fermented 
liquors;  and  the  liquor  dealers  of  that  one  Territory  paid  into  the  National 
Treasury  a revenue  tax  of  $25,546  96.  In  the  other  Territories  there  were  in 
1872,  of  manufacturers  of  fermented  liquors,  in  Arizona,  10 ; Dakota,  6 ; 
Idaho,  12;  Montana,  36;  New  Mexico,  8;  Utah,  16;  and  Washington  Terri- 
tory, 14.  The  last  fiscal  year,  the  licensed  liquor  dealers  of  Arizona  paid  a 
revenue  tax  on  their  trafldc  to  the  National  Treasury  of  $11, .339  01 ; of  Dakota, 
$4,738  21 ; of  Idaho,  $19,146  24;  of  Montana,  $27,065  07 ; of  New  Mexico.  $15,- 
090  50;  of  Utah,  $12,026  74 ; of  Washington  Territory,  $14.661  60;  of  Wyom- 
ing, $4,692  64.  The  aggregate  revenue  paid  to  the  National  Treasury  by  the 
licensed  Uquor  dealers  of  all  vhe  Territories  for  the  last  fiscal  year  was  $134,- 
306  97. 

These  Territories  are  now  in  the  formative  period.  They  are  rapidly  fiE- 
ing  up  with  a population  by-and-by  to  bo  admitted  to  the  Union  as  States. 
Whether  they  shall  bo  henceforth  consecrated  to  temperance  and  its  attend- 
ant blessings,  or  to  inebriety  and  its  evils,  will  depend  upon  the  action  of  the 
National  Government  now.  Who  can-  doubt  that  it  would  be  the  policy  of  a 
wise  and  an  enlightened  statesmanship  to  at  once  exclude,  by  national  edict, 
the  traffic  in  intoxicating  liquors  as  a beverage  from  their  borders  ? 

lu  the  present  law  relating  to  the  liquor  tratdo  with  the  Indians,  which  has 
been  for  nearly  forty  years  upon  the  National  statute-book,  we  have  an  impor- 
tant precedent  for  stringent  nation  al  prohibitory  legislation.  It  requires  only 
to  bo  made  universal  instead  of  partial  in  its  application. 

Congress  should  also  require  henceforth  of  every  new  Territorial  applicant 
for  admission  into  the  Union  (as  ia  the  Omaha  Indian  Eeservation  Land 
Fatents)  a fundamental  constitutional  proviso  for  ever  prohibiting  the  Uquoi 
traffic. 


H-ATIONAL  LEGISLATIOIf. 


3 


FOEEIGN  IMPOKTATION-. 

"With  the  Congress  of  the  United  States  rests  also  the  entire  control  over 
the  importation  of  alcoholic  liquors  from  foreign  countries.  In  1872,  the 
import  trade  in  distilled  liquors  represented  a retail  value  of  $27,000,003; 
fermented  liquors,  $2,800,009 ; vines,  $135,000,000 — an  aggregate  of  $101,- 
800,000.  It  vill  ho  seen  that  the  business  assumes  immense  proportions  as  a 
commercial  interest.  It  is  recognized  and  treated  by  the  National  Govern- 
ment as  having  a legitimate,  and  therefore  a respectable,  status.  That  thoim- 
portation  of  foreign  vines  and  other  alcoholic  liquors  has  much  to  do  vith 
the  perpetuation  of  the  harmful  social  drinking  usages  is  only  too  apparent. 
So  much  alcohol  as  may  be  necessary  for  scientific  and  mechamical  purposes 
can  easily  bo  provided  hero.  Importation  from  abroad  is  thcreforo  vholly 
unnecessary.  Our  ports  are  visely  guarded  against  the  approach  from  foreign 
shores  of  cholera,  small-pox,  yellow  fever,  and  other  infectious  diseases 
which  would  imperil  the  public  health.  Passengers,  cargo,  and  vessel  are 
rigorously  quarantined,  however  great  the  inconvenience  or  loss.  But  all 
the  infectious  diseases  combined  give  rise  to  only  a small  fractional  part  of 
the  suffering  and  death  which  imported  alcoholic  poison  occasions.  Why 
should  not  it  also  bo  quarantined  and  prohibited  an  entrance  into  our  ports 
henceforth  ? To  secure  early  legislation  by  Congress  to  this  end  should  be 
an  aim  of  the  friends  of  temperance  in  all  parts  of  the  country. 

CIVIL  SEKVICE. 

In  the  administration  of  the  civil  service,  temperance  should  have  consid- 
eration and  recognition.  A republic  should  require  of  its  servants,  from 
chief  executive  to  the  offieial  of  lowest  rank,  as  an  indispensable  qua.lification 
for  the  public  trust,  total  abstinence  from  all  alcoholic  liquors  as  beverages. 

After  an  extended  experience  and  observation  in  official  life,  Thomas  Jef- 
ferson, a short  time  before  his  death,  said:  “Were  I to  commence  my  ad- 
ministration again,  with  the  knowledge  which,  from  experience,  I have  ac- 
quired, the  first  question  1 would  ask  with  regard  to  every  public  candidate 
for  public  ofiBce  should  be.  Is  ho  addicted  to  the  use  of  ardent  spirits  1”  The 
later  experience  of  our  Government  confirms  the  wisdom  and  importance  of 
this  opinion  so  early  expressed  by  President  Jefferson  concerning  the  civil 
service. 

COMMISSION  OF  ENQUTET. 

An  urgent  need  of  the  temperance  reform  at  the  present  time  is  of  compre- 
hensive and  authentic  statistical  information.  This  need  is  within  the  scope 
of  the  National  Government  to  supply.  Commissions  of  one  kind  and 
another  are  authorized  by  Congress  to  enquire  into  and  report  various  mea- 
sures and  propositions  involving  local  and  national  interests.  No  one  will 
deny  that  the  interests,  pecuniary  and  otherwise,  involved  in  the  liquor  traf- 
fic are  sufficient  In  magnitude  and  importance  to  warrant  official  enquiry. 
In  1872,  the  amount  of  revenue  paid  to  the  National  Treasury  on  distilled 
spirits  was  $49,475,516  36,  representing  about  100,000,009  gallons  at  a retail 
value  of  about  $317,000,000.  Dealers  in  fermented  liquors  paid  in  taxes  on 


4 


NATIONAL  LEGISLATION. 


their  traffic  $3,573,489  33,  representing  an  aggregate  money  interest  of  aborm 
1300,000,000.  The  home  irine  trade  represento  a value  of  about  $75,000,000. 
All  this  in  addition  to  the  foreign  import  trade,  representing  a total  value  of 
about  $165,000,000.  Including  the  capital  invested  in  buildings,  machinerv, 
and  other  expenses  involved  in  the  liriuor  trade,  an  aggregate  of  its  total  pc- 
cuniary  interest  in  1872  vas  at  least  $1,500,000,000.  The -srhole  number  of 
places  of  sale  paying  taxes  to  the  National  Treasury  for  the  year  ■was  168,420. 
This  leaves  out  of  view  entirely  the  largo  number  ■who  sell  alcohol  and  de- 
fraud the  Government  of  all  revenue  therefrom.  The  opponents  of  prohibi- 
tion habitually  assert  that  prohibitory  legislation  for  the  suppression  of  the 
Hqnor  traffic  and  intemperance  has  been,  wherever  tried,  a failure.  The  gen- 
eral results  of  the  liquor  traffic  are  well  known.  There  are,  however,  no  well- 
tabulated,  authentic,  national  statistics  as  to  its  fruition  in  crime,  disease, 
and  pauperism. 

It  is  due  to  all  classes  that  there  should  be  an  impartial  national  commis- 
sion authorized  by  Congress,  1st,  to  enquire  into  and  report  upon  the  liquor 
traffic  and  its  relations  to  the  public  welfare ; and,  2d,  the  results  of  restric- 
tive and  prohibitory  legislation  in  the  several  States  of  the  Union  for  the  sup- 
pression of  intemperance. 

HO^W  ATTAINED. 

How  shall  this  legislation  be  attained  ? "We  do  not,  of  course,  expect  it  to 
be  realized  at  once.  IVo  do  expect  it,  and  more,  to  be  gained  ultimately. 
There  can  be  no  complete  triumph  of  the  temperance  reform  without  it.  A 
temperance  constituency,  largo  in  numbers,  and,  if  united  in  policy  and 
purpose,  weighty  in  influence,  already  exists  -within  and  outside  of  the  various 
temperance  organizations  in  every  State  and  Territory  of  the  Union.  Alli- 
ances or  leagues,  embracing  the  membership  of  the  different  temperance 
societies  and  all  good  citizens  friendly  to  national  prohibitory  legislation, 
should  be  at  once  formed  in  every  Congressional  district.  The  existing 
Congress  should  bo  earnestly  memorialized  for  the  reasonable  legislatioa 
desired.  Candidates  hereafter  should  be  selected  and  voted  for  with  refer- 
tace  to  their  trustworthiness  in  respect  to  temperance  as  a national  issue, 
fhe  press,  the  pulpit,  and  the  platform  should  be  urged  to  unite  in  direct- 
ing the  public  thought  to  this  national  agency  of  Congressional  action, 
and  to  the  importance  of  efficient  organization  with  especial  reference  there- 
to. Clergymen  and  members  of  churches  should  work  with  a will  and  as  a 
unit  in  this  direction.  Moral  suasion  should  generate  the  motive  power — a 
right  public  opinion.  Intelligent,  vigorous  political  organization  should 
apply  this  aggregate  power  of  citizenship,  through  legislation  and  the  ma- 
chinery of  administrative  government,  to  the  end  to  be  attained — the  abso- 
lute prohibition  of  the  traffic  in  alcoholic  poison  for  drinking  purposes 
throughout  our  national  domain. 


Published  by  The  National  Temperance  Society  and  Publica- 
tion House,  No.  5S  Eeade  Street,  Xe-w  Tore, 

AT  §3  PER  Thousand. 


No.  118: 


The  Sabbath  and  the  Beer  Question. 

BY  EEV.  GEOEGE  LANSING  TAYLOR.  M.A. 


U B American  Sabbath  is  now  assaulted  from  opposite  direetiona 
at  once  by  two  of  the  mightiest  foes  that  have  yet  lifted  hands 
against  it.  English  deism  has  assaulted  it  in  the  past,  and 
Bhench  infidelity,  and  atheism  in  more  recent  times,  but 
neither  of  them  produced  much  permanent  impression  upon 
it.  Its  keeping  was  then  in  the  hands  of  an  American-born 
population  reared  under  its  influence ; and  the  foreign  vote 
in  favor  of  those  who,  for  votes,  would  legislate  for  its  destruction  was 
too  small  to  find  Judases  for  sale.  Politics  had  not  then,  as  now, 
liecome  merely  another  kind  of  commerce,  in  which  votes  and  offices  are 
the  merchandise  bought  and  sold  from  wholesale  to  retail.  NTow  all  this 
is  changed.  The  situation  is  entirely  different,  and  Jesuitism  on  the  one 
ri«md,  and  German  irreligion  on  the  other,  find  a iotally  different  state 
C'f  things  in  America.  With  a vast  voting  constituency  of  their  own 
fort  on  the  one  hand,  and  the  ominous  corraptibility  of  all  classes  of 
riffice-seekers  and  holders  on  the  other,  the  chances  for  victory  for  the 
Christian  Sabbath  and  all  other  moral  institutions  are  not  to  human  eyes 
the  clearest. 

One  ol'  the  most  powerful  elements  in  the  grand  complex  of  influences 
which  the  irreligion  of  continental  Europe,  and  particularly  that  of  Ger- 
many, is  arraying  against  the  American  Sabbath,  is  heer  and  its  sur- 
roundings. The  Sabbath  beer  question  is  one  whose  importance  we  have 
hardly  yet  begun  to  understand ; and,  yet  there  is  no  other  such  foe  to 
our  Sabbath  at  work  in  America  to-day  as  the  German  beer  influence. 
Let  us  consider  the  two  aspects  of  this  inevitable  conflict  between  the 
Sabbath  and  oeer,  namely  : 

1.  The  powers  which  beer  arrays  against  the  Sabbath  ; and 

2.  Some  reasons  why  these  powers  ought  not  to  prevail. 

I.  The  powers  which  beer  arrays  against  the  Sabbath. 

These  are  many  and  mighty.  We  can  only  notice  them  comprehen- 
sively under  a few  heads ; 

1.  The  Financial  Power  of  the  beer  interest  is  verily  formidable. 
The  Annual  Congress  of  the  Brewers  of  the  United  States  held  its  ses- 
sion for  1872  in  New  York.  Its  President,  in  his  opening  address,  gav* 
some  of  the  statistics  of  the  beer  business  as  foUows  : 


Number  of  breweries  in  the  United  States,  . 
Gapital  invested,  . . . .. 

Revenue  paid  to  United  States  Government  in  1871, 
Barley  annually  consumed,  bushels, 

Hops  “ *•  pounds, 

Land  “ cultivated  for  both,  acres,  over  . 

Persons  “ employed  in  various  ways,  . 


. 3,000 

. $100,000,000 
$7,800,000 

23.000. 000 

18.000. 000 
1,000,000 

many  thousands. 


Now,  no  intelligent  person  can  consider  these  figures  without  com- 
prehending how  vast  is  their  significance.  And  then,  the  relations  of 
such  a great  financial  power  to  all  other  branches  of  business  must  also 
be  taken  into  consideration.  The  farmer,  the  shipper,  the  cooper,  the 
engineer,  the  teamster,  the  landlord,  the  advertiser,  and  the  dealer,  aa 
well  as  the  brewer  and  malstcr,  must  be  counted  in,  since  they  are  all 
involved  in  the  finaucial  interests  of  the  business.  They  are  all  under 
Its  pay,  directly  or  indirectly.  Such  an  enemy  stands  on  a basis  fai 
different  from  that  of  a volunteer  reform  movement.  It  is  a mine  of 
money — money  gotten  by  robbery  and  murder,  to  be  sure,  but  money 
nevertheless,  and  money  easily  and  rapidly  made,  and  to  protect  the 
making  of  which  emn-mous  sums  can  be  spent  and  stiB  leave  a greater 


2 


THE  SABBATH  AND  THE  BEER  QUESTIOIT. 


margin  of  profit  than  any  legitimate  business  mil  bear.  The  beer  brew- 
ers of  the  State  of  blew  York  pay  a talented  and  experienced  lawyer  a 
princely  annual  salary  for  his  services  in  looking  after  their  interests  in 
State  legislation  in  Albany.  In  the  same  manner,  the  brewers  all  over 
the  nation  pay  immense  sums  every  year  to  sustain  their  common  cau<o 
and  to  enforce  their  demands.  They  even  take  advantage  of  the  great 
revenue  exacted  from  them  by  the  fTeneral  Government  to  make  it  the 
foundation  of  a claim  to  respectability  and  patriotism  (!),  and  to  demand 
corresponding  protection  before  the  law. 

This  is  the  vast  moneyed  power  which,  as  such,  assails-  the  defences 
oi  the  Sabbath.  It  claims  the  Sabbath  on  business  grounds.  Saturday 
is  pay-day,  Sunday  is  rest-day.  On  Sunday,  therelbre,  men  have  both 
money  to  buy  and  leisure  to  drink  and  carouse.  Sunday,  therefore, 
aught  to  be — and  but  for  those  pharisaical  American  bigotries  would  be 
—the  best  business  day  in  the  week.  It  has  long  been  the  best  business 
day  for  the  beer-seller  in  Europe.  "lYhy  should  it  not  be  so  here  ? Is 
not  this  the  boasted  land  of  liberty  ? Did  he  not  come  here  for  liberty  t 

2.  T/ie  Political  Power  of  beer  is  a direct  result  of  its  financial 
power,  as  employed  according  to  its  own  bad  principles  and  directed  to 
its  o-wn  bad  end.  Ho  legitimate  traffic  aspires  to  the  possession  of  such 
political  power,  or  to  such  a use  of  it.  But  the  beer  interest  knows  that 
the  legal  safeguards  of  morality,  and  especially  the  Sabbath,  must  be 
broken  down  in  this  country  before  it  can  have  full  sway  for  itself. 
Hence  its  incessant  efforts  to  seize  upon  the  legislation  of  the  country  ; 
and  in  this  matter  it  acts  without  disguise,  and  makes  no  secret  of  its 
efforts  or  their  intention. 

3.  r/ie  (Social  Poioer  o/ Beer  is  another  mighty  influence  against  the 
Sabbath.  That  it  is  a mighty  social  power  is  undeniable.  All  intoxi- 
cants are.  They  tend  to  draw  men  together  for  social  indulgence,  and 
to  insinuate  themselves  into  assemblies  not  convened  especially  on  their 
account,  and  take  possession  of  them.  They  tend  to  mould  to  their  own 
stamp  .'ill  the  social  life  -with  which  they  come  in  contact,  from  that  of 
the  public  drinking  and  smoking  resort  to  that  of  the  private  parlor 
Now,  it  is  apparently  true  that,  from  its  peculiar  character  and  effects, 
the  social  iuliueuce  of  beer  over  those  coming  under  its  sway  is  greater 
than  that  of  any  other  intoxicant  known  in  America,  perhaps  in  the 
world.  Strong  liquors,  opium,  and  other  similar  drugs  nnickly  isolate 
their  devotees  from  society  by  complete  intoxication.  But  the  diluted 
and  inexpensive  form  of  alcohol  as  used  in  beer  enables  its  drinker  to 
spend  several  hours  in  the  progressive  process  of  intoxication  before 
his  faculties  are  completely  eclipsed  ; and  these  are  the  hours  of  social 
hilarity  and  moral  abaudonment  before  the  power  of  enjoyment  is  para- 
lyw!d.  This  explains  the  social  power  of  beer.  Men  and  women  ean  on 
ft  maintain  a low  degree  of  intoxication,  exactly  adapted  to  reckless 
mirth  and  revelry,  for  a whole  Sabbath  afternoon  and  evening,  without 
necessarily  getting  helplessly  drunk,  at  least  not  until  late  at  night. 
Thus  it  stimulates,  while  at  the  same  time  it  perverts  and  debases,  the 
social  faculties.  No  other  intoxicant  in  existence  offers  such  a lure  to 
unholy  dissipation  on  the  Sabbath,  the  day  of  relaxation  from  ordinary 
toil.  Its  nature,  cheapness,  and  effects  tend  to  draw  men  and  women 
away  from  home  and  from  the  ho-’we  of  God  to  places  of  public  social 
resort,  to  saloons,  gardens,  and  groves,  where,  observed  only  by  those 
fimilarly  employed,"they  can  spend  the  sacred  hours  in  smoking,  drink- 
ing, hilarity,  music,  and  dancing,  often  ending  in  reckless  revelry  and 
debauch,  in  which  all  social,  and  often  all  natural,  distinctions  are  for- 
gotten. 

4.  The  Whishey  Power  is  itself  a part  of  the  beer  power.  The  beer  is 
only  the  thin  point  of  the  wedge,  which  expands  through  wine,  and  gin, 
And  rum,  and  brandy,  until  its  head  of  power  is  reached  in  the  untold 
hourors  of  adulterated  whiskey  It  is  the  most  transparent  cf  shams  foi 


THE  SABBATH  AND  THE  BEER  QUESTION. 


8 


the  adyoeates  of  beer  to  pretend,  as  General  Sigel  did  in  onr  delate 
before  the  New  York  Legislature’s  committee,  and  as  all  its  apolog.sta 
pretend,  that  beer  is  an  agent  in  the  service  of  temperance  and  morahiy ! 
Satan  is  not  yet  often  such  a fool  as  to  be  divided  against  himself.  There 
is  no  such  good  news  for  the  cause  of  truth  as  that.  Every  apologist 
for  beer  knows  that  the  liquor  interests  of  the  country,  next  to  directly 
helping  themselves,  stand  constantly  ready  to  give  their  whole  power 
to  help  cn  those  of  the  beer  traffic.  Beer  is  the  insidious  and  pervasive 
jackal  that  here,  as  in  i-ts  native  wilds,  is  ever  on  the  alert  to  scent  and 
liunt  down  the  prey  it  cannot  master  alone,  for  lion  alcohol  to  tear  in 
pieces  and  devour ; and  it  gets  a like  protection  in  return  for  its  work. 
But  beer,  the  social  jackal,  hunts  in  company,  and  few  are  the  victims 
whom  its  combined  allurements  are  not  able  to  destroy.  The  Christian 
Sabbath  it  claims  as  its  grand  hunting-day,  and  our  loved  America  for 
the  scene  of  its  brutalizing  orgies.  And  it  has  in  reality  the  whole 
frightful  list  of  alcoholic  and  diabolic  drinks  to  push  it  on.  "When  was 
a liquor  dealers’  association  ever  known  to  ask  that  the  sacredness  of  the 
Sabbath  be  preserved  ? “When  has  it  asked  that  the  taxation  on  beer  be 
increased,  or  its  manufacture  or  sale  diminished  ? When  have  these 
interests  ever  quarrelled,  except  over  their  mutual  spoils  ? Beer  is  no 
better  than  its  company.  All  are  alike  wolves  of  one  pack,  and  they 
should  die  together  in  the  pit  they  have  digged. 

These  are  a few  of  the  many  and  mighty  forces  which  beer  is  to-day 
marshalling  on  this  continent  against  the  Christian  Sabbath.  In  theii 
presence  beer  rises  from  insignificance  to  the  proportions  of  a hydra. 
But  let  us  consider: 

II.  Some  of  the  Reasons  why  these  powers  ought  not  to  prevail, 

1.  The  Temperance  Eeason.  For  the  sake  of  the  cause  of  tempe- 
rance, the  beer  traffic  should  be  prohibited  on  the  Sabbath.  If  the  trad* 
cannot  be  stopped  on  the  holy  day,  how  can  it  ever  be  stopped  on  secu 
lar  days?  If  it  can  be  stopped  on  that  day,  many  advantages  wil. 
result.  In  the  first  place,  the  largest  one  day’s  drinking  of  the  week  is 
cut  off.  It  is  not  true  that  what  men  lose  from  their  drinks  on  Sunday 
they  will  make  up  on  other  days.  It  is,  rather,  true  that  if  they  spend 
Sunday  soberly,  they  will  be  more  likely  to  spend  Monday  so  also.  The 
sobering  and  hallowing  respite  of  Sunday  will  be  more  likely  to  lead 
to  better  thoughts,  to  give  conscience  a chance  to  be  heard,  the 
home-feeling  and  the  fear  of  God  a chance  to  be  felt;  and  the  more  they 
are  felt,  the  more  lilcely  is  the  drinker  to  come  to  his  senses.  No  drunk- 
ard is  hopeless  who  spends  his  Sundays  sober.  Nor  will  men  generally 
buy  up  on  Saturday  their  drink  for  two  days,  and  drink  at  home.  The 
public  resort,  the  company  to  be  met  there,  the  escape  from  the  scrutiny 
of  home,  are  powerful  seducers  to  drink,  many  of  which  are  taken  away 
when  the  beer-shops  are  closed.  Drinking  in  solitude  or  among  the  sur 
roun  dings  of  home  is  quite  another  matter  from  diinkiug  where  drinking 
is  in  order,  and  where  it  is  out  of  order  not  to  drink. 

But  again,  the  temperance  cause  would  gain  because  the  most  ex- 
pensive, protracted,  and  riotous  drinking  is  that  done  on  the  Sabbath, 
and  all  this  would  be  changed.  If  men  can  be  saved  from  the  worst  of 
all  drinking  dayo,  there  is  hope  for  the  other  days.  If  they  can  save  the 
wages  received  on  Saturday,  and  keep  some  of  it  over  Sunday,  they  are 
more  likely  to  keep  it  through  the  week,  or  get  it  into  the  savings-bank. 
No  one  movement  is  more  perilous  to  the  cause  of  temperance  than  that 
which  would  make  Sunday  the  great  day  of  drinking,  and  of  the  worst 
and  most  demoraliziag  drinkiiig  of  all  the  week. 

The  plea  that  beer,  by  supplanting  rum,  is  a reformatory  agent  whose 
consumption  on  the  Sabbath,  or  any  other  day,  tends  to  diminish  that  of 
neavier  liquors,  is  a groundless  and  oft-exploded  fallacy.  The  weakW 


4 


THE  SABBATH  AND  THE  BEER  QUESTIOlf. 


intoxicants  never  satisfy  the  craving  for  the  stronger,  but  invariably 
excite  and  aggravate  it. 

But  the  Sabbath  must  be  preserved  against  the  assaults  of  beer  for 

2.  The  Patriotic  Reason.  That  which  demoralizes  and  debauches  the 
people  ruins  the  nation.  In  fact,  what  is  the  nation  but  the  unity  of  its 
people  ? No  national  prosperity,  no  national  existence,  ever  did  or  ever 
can  outlive  the  virtues  of  its  people.  The  corruption  and  debasement  oi 
the  masses  of  the  common  people  has  ever  been  the  rot  that  has  destroyed 
empires.  No  virtuous  and  moral  people  were  ever  enslaved.  But' let 
the  Sabbath  be  overthrown,  and  all  other  moral  restraints  would  soon 
fall  with  it,  and  Paris,  Babylon,  Sodom,  would  soon  finish  the  story. 
The  Christian  Sabbath  has  done  more  for  America  thg,n  all  her  fertile 
soil,  her  fine  climate,  her  rivers,  lakes,  forests,  gold-mines,  or  coal.  It 
has  civilized  and  ennobled  her  men,  purified  and  exalted  her  women, 
and  taught  her  children  to  revere  the  name  of  their  country  next  to  that 
of  their  God.  If  we  want  to  diminish  crime,  pauperage,'and  taxation, 
to  lighten  the  people’s  burdens  and  to  increase  their  power  to  bear  them, 
then  stand  fast  by  the  American  Sabbath.  It  is  the  common  law  of  our 
laud ; let  it  be  of  our  hearts  also.  It  is  as  truly  a part  of  our  constitu- 
tional '.buiidatious,  though  unwritten,  as  the  Bill  of  Rights,  the  Decla- 
ration of  Independence,  or  the  Constitution  itself.  The  hand  lilted 
Against  it  is  feeling  for  one  of  the  central  piUars  that  prop  the  temple  of 
American  liberty.  But, 

3.  The  Religious  Reason  is  the  one  of  final  and  all-impcrtant  weight. 
Man  is  a being  of  two  natures,  living  two  lives,  and  destined  for  two 
worlds.  The  Sabbath  was  ordained  by  God  at  creation  expressly  to 
minister  to  his  noblest  being  and  his  immortal  interests.  'Whatever 
makes  war  upon  the  day  set  apart  by  his  Maker  for  especial  attention  to 
those  interests  makes  war  upon  what  is  worth  more  to  mankind  than 
wealth,  or  kindred,  or  native  country.  The  Sabbath  is  the  window,  the 
skylight  of  the  week,  opened  by  divine  law  and  love  up  through  the 
clouds,  and  murk,  and  imnnoil  of  this  earthly  lile  to  a clearer  sky  and  a 
diviner  life  above.  That  skylight  of  the  soul  must  be  kept  open,  or  mau’s 
immortal  nature;  must  be  smothered  like  the  lost  miner  in  the  choke- 
damp  of  the  mine.  This  world  can  never  be  saved  without  the  Sabbath, 
as  a day  for  rest,  for  reason,  for  repentance  and  communion  between 
man’s  soul  and  its  source  and  God.  To  close  the  Sabbath  for  spiritual 
use  aud  power  would  be  to  shut  the  one  only  window  of  a more  than 
Calcutta  Black-Hole  upon  a world  of  gasping,  djing  souls ! To  convert 
it  into  a day  of  profane  dissipation  and  brutalizing  debauch  is  so  to  close 
it,  or  what  is  the  same  thing,  to  hurry  men  blindly  and  deliriously  away 
from  the  only  breathing-place  for  their  spiritual  life.  How  can  a nation 
of  Sunday  beer-guzzlers  and  licentious  revellers  be  reached  by  the  Gos- 
pel of  salvation  f Let  the  strong  arm  of  civil  law,  as  it  is  bound  to  do, 
protect  the  quiet  and  devout  worshipper  from  disturbance,  and  in  pro- 
tecting the  rights  of  the  worshipper  also  at  thi;  same  time  confer  an  inea 
timable  boon  upon  his  disturber.  The  beer-drinking  portions  of  out 
great  cities  are  now  a pandemonium  when  selling  aud  driuldug  are 
Rjlowed  on  the  Sabbath.  The  shops  must  be  closed  aud  the  trade 
Etopped,  or  we  are  on  the  way  to  Spanish  bull-fights  after  the  Lord's 
Supper,  and  the  riot  aud  doom  of  Gomomth  in  the  end.  Let  us  keep 
the  window  of  the  Sabbath  open  between  earth  and  heaven,  lest  eartu 
become  the  vestibule  of  hell.  Rather  let  the  American  Sabbath,  radiant 
with  mi  re  than  natural  sunshine,  brighten  onwardinto  earth’s  millennial 
lest  and  glory. 


l^t^LISHED  BY  THE  NATIONAL  Te.MPERANCE  SOCIETY  AND 

LIGATION  House,  No.  58  Re-^de  Street,  New 
York,  at  per  Thousand. 


No.  119. 


Moral  and  Legal  Suasion. 


BY  KOBERT  C.  PITAIAN. 

Associate  Justice  Superior  Courts  Mass, 

HE  field  is  so  wide  that  one  hardly  knows  where  to 
enter  it.  I am  continually  more  and  more  impressed 
myself  with  the  grandeur  and  the  breadth  of  this 
temperance  reform;  and  it  seems  to  me  that  the 
most  enthusiastic  of  us  have  not  perceived  the  full 
scope  and  grandeur  of  the  movement.  It  seems  to  me  sometimes 
that,  to  effectively  present  any  great  reform,  we  want  to  relate 
it  to  great  fundamental  truths;  and  there  is  danger  that  we 
shall  narrow  this  subject  by  looking  at  it  from  a single  point  of 
view.  My  interest  in  this  temperance  reform  is  not  as  a man 
of  one  idea,  unless  you  make  that  one  idea  as  grand  as  humanity 
and  as  broad  as  the  world.  My  interest  in  this  cause  is  not  a 
question  of  appetite — a question  of  what  a man  shall  eat  or  drink 
— but  it  is  because  it  is  deeply  related  to  human  progress  and  to 
Christian  development.  Every  age  and  every  civilization  has 
its  dominant  idea.  You  know  in  the  earliest  civilization  (the 
Hebrew)  there  was  the  unity  of  God;  then,  in  the  Grecian  civil- 
ization, its  ideals  were  those  of  beauty  and  art.  That  was  the 
great  dominant  idea  of  Grecian  civilization.  Then  we  come  to 
the  Roman  civilization;  law,  power,  and  authority  were  the 
genius  of  Rome.  Now  we  come  to  Christian  civilization,  and  we 
have  a different  ideal.  The  fundamental  idea  of  Christian  civil- 
ization, you  know,  is  the  fatherhood  of  God,  and  that  brings 
with  it  the  brotherhood  of  man.  So  that  we  test  all  things  by 
seeing  whether  they  tend  to  human  development,  whether  they 
tend  to'  make  man  more  in  the  likeness  of  God,  his  heavenly 
Father;  and  we  test  the  value  of  all  reforms  by  seeing  how 
Important  and  fundamental  they  are  in  carrying  forward  thia 


2 


MORAL  AND  LEGAL  SUASION. 


grand  idea  of  our  civilization.  Now,  it  seems  to  me,  if  we  take 
even  the  concessions  of  men  who  are  not  with  us,  we  must  allow 
that  this  monster  evil  of  intemperance  is  not  only  a great  barrier, 
hut  the  great  hamer  to  social  development  and  to  a completo 
Christian  civilization.  It  is  among  the  platitudes  of  papers  such 
as  the  London  Times  that  intemperance  causes  more  evil  than 
anything  else  in  the  world;  and  one  of  the  leading  minds  of 
England,  not  a special  temperance  reformer— Bishop  Temple- 
said  the  other  day  in  Exeter  HaU  that,  of  all  the  preventible 
evils  of  the  world,  intemperance  was  the  greatest ; it  was  the 
cause  of  more  misery  than  any  preventible  evil  that  existed. 

Well,  now,  if  we  believe  that,  the  first  call  of  the  Christian, 
the  first  call  of  the  philanthropist,  the  first  call  of  the  statesman, 
is  to  roll  away  this  barrier  to  our  civilization  and  to  our  progress. 
It  is  not  because  this  stain  interests  us;  it  is  not  because  there 
is  anything  attractive  in  the  drinking  habits  of  the  nation;  but 
it  is  because  we  find  a barrier  here  which  we  must  get  out  of  the 
way  before  we  can  i)ass  on  to  a broader  and  better  civilization. 
Vulgar,  coarse,  and  common  as  the  obstacle  is,  it  is  an  obstacle 
that  stands  in  the  way ; and  we  must  remember  that  it  is  a doc- 
trine of  Christianity  that  the  humblest  and  the  poorest  (if  I may 
use  the  expression)  service  that  can  be  performed  for  humanity 
is  the  noblest,  if  it  is  necessary.  That,  I take  it,  was  the  great 
lesson  that  our  Saviour  wished  to  teach  when  he  took  a towel 
and  girded  himself  after  dinner,  and  washed  the  feet  of  his  dis- 
ciples. I take  it  that  that  is  the  great  lesson  which  this  age  is 
learning — feeling  that  the  humblest  service  for  man  is  not  vul- 
’■gar,  but  that  it  is  the  truest  nobility.  And  yet,  how  general  and 
how  wide  should  be  the  dissemination  of  this  lesson,  compared 
with  what  it  is  ! Why  is  it  that  our  men  of  culture  and  refine- 
ment, the  noble  of  the  land,  men  who  ought  by  their  position  to 
take  a lead  in  this  movement,  are  only  to  be  seen  here  and  thero, 
like  some  of  the  noble  friends  in  our  midst  ? But  the  great  mass 
of  the  reverend  clergy,  of  illustrious  senators,  of  i^ublic  men,  and 
the  great  mass,  not  only  of  fashion,  but  of  culture  and  refine- 
ment, are  not  found  in  our  movement  to-day.  Why  is  it  ? I 
cannot  stop  to  tell  you  all  the  reasons  why.  I simply  advert  to 
the  fact.  From  the  time  of  the  apostles  to  the  present,  it  has 


MOKA.L  AND  LEGAL  SUASION, 


3 


always  been  so.  You  reach  the  masses  before  you  reach  those 
who  are  assuming  to  lead  them  in  the  advance  of  society  and 
of  culture'.  It  belongs  to  the  few  to  take  their  part  with  these 
great  truths,  and  to  be  honored  in  their  advocacy  and  in  earnest 
efforts  for  their  furtherance. 

The  temperance  reform,  broad  as  it  is,  divides  itself  naturally 
into  two  branches ; it  is  a reform  of  two  methods.  It  is  a re- 
form, you  know,  in  the  first  place,  of  the  individual;  it  is  a 
struggle  against  inward  temptation;  and  then,  as  applied  to 
society,  it  is  a struggle  against  the  outward  incitement.  So  that, 
again,  it  divides  itself  into  moral  and  legal  suasion.  We  need 
moral  suasion,  of  course,  as  the  foundation  of  everything ; we 
need  correct  public  sentiment  as  the  foundation  of  all  correct 
action,  and  nobody  can  overvalue  this.  It  is  always  to  be  pre- 
sent in  our  efforts,  and  nobody  should  think,  if  we  make  but  little 
mention  of  it  in  our  conventions,  that  we  therefore  ignore  it.  It 
is  because  we  do  not  wish  perpetually  to  go  laying  again  the 
foundation.  The  foundations  have  been  laid.  We  all  believe  in 
it;  we  all  know  it ; we  were  all  brought  up  to  appreciate  the 
value  of  it;  and  wo  do  not  wash  to  be  repeatedly  naming  to 
weaiisomeness  the  platitudes  that  have  been  repeated  so  often 
in  regard  to  this  cause.  We  know  it  ail  by  heart ; we  value  and 
cling  ti  it,  and  we  expect  to  as  long  as  we  are  engaged  in  this 
temperance  warfare.  But  out  of  this  grows  the  necessity  for 
legal  suasion.  I have  a very  short  method  with  those  whq  advo- 
cate moral  suasion  alone.  I say,  “ Practise  it  upon  yourself  first. 
Persuade  yourself  first  to  be  total-abstinence  men ; for  niue- 
tenths  of  the  men  who  talk  about  this  are  not  total-abstinence 
men  themselves.  Persuade  yourselves,  then  try  it  upon  your 
neighbor ; then  go  hand-in-hand  with  those  noble  organizations 
that  are  lifting  up  the  weak.  Do  the  work  of  moral  suasion ; 
lift  men  up  from  the  gutter ; and  then,  depend  upon  it,  there 
will  bo  no  man  more  earnest  and  pronounced  than  you  in  an 
effort  to  make  the  streets  safe  for  the  meu  whom  you  have  res- 
cued from  the  gutter.”  No  man  who  has  a Christian  heart,  who 
has  wept  and  prayed  over  the  victim  of  intemperance,  and  has 
succeeded  in  elevating  him  into  the  image  of  God,  with  a clean 
heart  and  a pure  soul — no  man  trembles  more  than  that  man 


i 


KOKAL  AND  LEGAL  SUASION. 


when  he  sends  him  forth  to  his  daily  work  to  run  the  gauntlet 
of  the  legalized  grog-shops  that  he  in  his  path ; and  no  matter 
what  that  man’s  theory  may  have  been  when  he  started,  he 
comes  back  from  the  work  of  benevolence  indignant  at  the  civi- 
iization  that  allows  the  weak  to  be  tempted  back  to  destruction 
again  by  this  public  incitement  to  vice  and  iniquity.  So  that 
let  every  man  follow  moral  suasion  to  the  end,  not  with  mouth 
and  word  only,  but  with  the  heart  and  hand,  and  I whl  risk  his 
feeling  upon  this  subject  of  legal  suasion. 

Now,  one  of  the  great  subjects  is  of  pohtical  action;  not  only 
because  it  is  an  important  question,  but  because  upon  most  other 
questions  we  are  fully  agreed.  Tears  ago,  we  settled  the  mat- 
ter that  temperance  meant  abstinence ; we  have  also  settled  the 
matter  that  there  was  to  be  no  distinction  between  intoxicants; 
we  have  settled,  in  some  vague  and  general  way,  the  question 
that  the  ballot  should  be  used  for  temperance ; but  how,  when, 
where,  and  in  what  manner  ? The.se  are  the  questions  to  be 
settled  now.  Therefore,  we  take  note  of  these  things ; we  dis- 
cuss them ; we  put  them  forward  in  every  convention ; they  put 
themselves  forward  in  every  convention  of  earnest  temperance 
men,  because  they  are  the  questions  of  the  hour.  Not  because 
they  supersede  moral  suasion,  net  because  they  put  out  of  sight 
these  other  questions,  but  because  we  are  agreed,  and  understand 
thoroughly  all  these  other  questions.  Upon  this  question  we  are 
not  agreed ; we  do  not  understand  it  thoroughly;  we  do  not  see 
our  way  clearly.  Therefore,  we  come  to  join  hand  in  hand,  and 
confer  together  as  Christian  brothers  upon  this  great  question 
of  the  hour.  And  in  so  doing,  let  me  say  that,  whatever  the 
form  of  political  action  that  wo  indulge  in,  we  are  then  and 
there  cari’ying  out  in  practice  the  most  impressive  way  of  moral 
suasion.  There  is  no  agitation  of  a community  upon  the  subject 
of  temperance  that  carries  with  it  the  force,  and  directness,  and 
inhueuce  that  a political  agitation  of  these  questions  does. 


Published  by  the  Natiokal  Temperance  Society  xitd  Publica- 
tion House,  No.  5S  Eeade  .‘Street,  New  Yoek, 

AT  §3  per  Thousand. 


Ho.  121. 

The  Results  of  PROHiBirioN. 

BY  A.  M.  POYYELL. 


COMMON  objection  continnally  reiterated  by  the  oppo- 
nents of  tiio  teniperance  reform  is  that  “ prohibition  ha* 
been  a failure.”  There  is,  of  course,  no  statute  law  which 
is  not  sometimes  violated.  The  real  question  involved 
is.  “ What  are  the  results  of  the  legal  prohibition  rm 
alcoholic  beverage.s,  co'upared  with  ordinary  legisla- 
tion ?” 


MAINE. 


The  experience  of  Maine,  the  pioneer  State,  cover.s  now  a perioa  oi 
« quarter  of  a century  in  conueciion  with  prohibitory  legislation. 
V\'e  present  the  evidence  of  those  thoroughly  qualified  to  testify. 

Tn  1872,  Governor  Perhain  writes:  “ In  regard  to  the  effect  of  the 
Maine  Law  upon  the  liquor  trade  in  this  State,  I think  it  safe  to  say 
that  it  is  very  much  less  than  before  the  enactment  of  the  law,  pro- 
bably not  one-tenth  as  large.  In  some  places  liquor  is  sold  secretly 
la  violation  of  law.  as  many  other  offences  are  committed  against 
the  statutes  and  the  peace  and  good  order  of  society  ; but  in  large 
districts  of  the  State  the  liquor  traffic  is  nearly  or  quite  unknown, 
wlieni  formerly  it  was  carried  on  like  any  other  trade.” 

Tho  lion.  W.  P.  Frye,  member  of  Congress  from  the  Lewiston 
district,  and  ex- Attorney-General  of  Maine,  also  (1S72)  writes:  “I 
;an  and  do,  from  my  own  personal  observation,  unhesitatingly  affirm 
lhat  the  ccnsumption  of  intoxicating  liquors  in  Maine  is  not  to-day 
nne-fourth  so  great  as  it  was  twenty  years  ago  ; tliat,  in  tlie  country 
portions  of  tlie  State,  tlie  sale  and  use  liave  almost  entirely  ceased , 
that  the  law  itself,  under  a vigorous  enforcement  of  its  pj-ovisions, 
bas  created  a temperance  sentiment  wliich  is  marvellous,  and  L* 
which  opposition  is  powerless.  In  my  opinion,  our  remarkable  tem- 
perance reform  of  to-day  is  the  legitimate  child  of  the  law.” 

The  Hon.  Lot  M.  Morrill,  United  States  Senator  from  Maine,  writes  : 
“ I have  the  honor  unhesitatingly  to  concur  in  the  opinions  ex- 
pressed in  the  foregoing  by  my  colleague,  Hon.  Mr.  Frye.” 

'ihe  Hon.  J.  G.  Blaine,  Speaker  of  the  House  of  Representati^'es, 
writes  : “ I concur  in  the  foregoing  statements  ; and  on  the  point 
of  the  relative  amount  of  liquors  sold  in  Maine  and  in  those  State* 
where  a system  of  license  prevails,  I am  very  sure,  from  personal 
knowledge  and  observation,  thai  the  sales  are  immeasurably  less  in 
Maine.” 

The  Hon.  Hannibal  Hamlin,  United  States  Senator  and  ex-Vioo- 
President  of  the  United  St.ates,  writes  : ” I concur  in  the  statement* 
made  by  Mr.  Frye.  In  the  great  good  produced  by  the  Prohibitory 
Liquor  Law  of  Maine  no  man  can  doubt  who  has  seen  its  result,  it 
has  been  of  immense  value.” 

The  Hon.  John  A.  Peters,  the  Hon.  John  Ijynch,  and  the  Hon., 
Eugene  Mall,  members  of  Congress  from  Maine,  substantiate  the  fore- 
going testimony. 

The  Hoft.  Benj.  Kingsbury,  Mayor  of  Portland  in  18/2,  and  four 
ex-Mayors,  concur  in  a statement  concerning  the  diminution  of  the 
liquor  traffic  in  tlie  State  of  Maine,  and  in  the  city  of  Portland  in 
particular,  that,  “ as  the  result  of  the  adoption  of  the  policy  of 

Erohibition,  we  have  to  say  the  traffic  has  fallen  off  very  largely 
1 relation  to  that  there  cannot  possibly  be  any  doubt.  Many  per 
sons  with  the  best  means  of  judging  believe  the  liquor  trade  now 
in  not  one-tenth  as  large  as  it  was  formerly  . . The  diminu 


2 


THE  BESTJLT8  DP  PKOHIBITIOJT, 


tion  of  the  trade  is  very  great,  and  the  favorable  e'Tects  of  th« 
polioy  of  prohibition  are  manifest  to  the  most  casual  obse’’ver.” 

Other  city  officials  of  Portland— judges,  City  Clerk,  Treasurer,  and 
others — testify  that  the  liquor  trade  is  greatly  diminished,  and  iu 
“ not  one-tenth  of  what  it  was  prior  to  the  adoption  of  the  Maine 
Law.” 

Twelve  well-known  clergymen  of  Portlana,  reyjresenting  th^ 
Congregational,  Baptist,  Protestant  Episcopal,  Methodist  Ej)!sco- 
pal,  Unitarian,  and  Universalist  Cluirches,  iu  1873  unite  in  the  de- 
claration that  the  trade  iu  intoxicating  liquors  has  been  great!  ■ 
reduce-1  by  the  Maine  Law.  They  say  ; '•  In  tliis  city,  the  quantity 
Bold  now  is  but  a small  fraction  of  what  we  remember  the  sales  to 
have  been,  and  we  believe  tlie  results  are  the  same,  or  nearly  stf, 
throughout  the  8tate.  If  the  trade  exists  at  all  here,  it  is  carried  on 
with  secrecy  and  caution,  as  other  umawful  practices  are.” 

The  Hon.  \Vm.  S.  Putnam,  an  ex-.Mayor  of  Portland,  a Democrat, 
avowedly  opposed  to  the  principles  of  prohibitory  liquor  laws,  says: 
“ 1 must  in  candor  state  1 have  had  good  opportunity  to  observe  the 
condition  of  this  State  iu  the  matter  of  the  u-e  and  sale  of  intoxica- 
ting liquors  for  several  years  past,  as  compared  with  some  other 
States  wliere  there  are  no  prohibitory  laws,  and  am  certain  that  the 
rural  portions  of  Dlaine  are,  and  have  been,  in  an  infinitely  better  con- 
dition with  reference  to  the  sale  and  use  of  such  liquors  than  similar 
portions  of  other  States  referred  to,  and  are,  and  have  been,  moreover, 
comparatively  free  from  both  the  sale  and  use ; and  this  must 
fairly  be  considered  the  result  of  prohibitory  legislation.  . . . The 
law  is  probably  enforced,  even  in  large  towns  and  cities,  as  thorough- 
ly, at  least,  as  any  other  yienal  statute.” 

The  Hon.  J.  S.  Wheeiight,  Mayor  of  Bangor  in  1S72,  writes: 
“ . . The  law  is  ueiug  enforced  throughout  the  State  as  never 
before,  and  with  wonderful  success.  Xo  resident  of  our  State  can 
have  any  doubt  that  the  li-mor  traffic  has  been  greatly  repressed  and 
reduced.”  Concurring  iu  iliis  statement  are  the  names  of  Aldermen 
for  1871  and  1872,  the  City  Clerk,  the  Recorder,  and  Judgeof  Probate. 

The.  Hon.  Wolcott  Hamlin,  Supervisor  of  luter<ial  Revenue  foi 
Maine,  writes,  1S72_^_  ‘‘  In  the  course  of  my  duty  as  an  internal  reve- 
nue officer,  1 have  become  thoroughly  acquainted  with  the  state  and 
extent  of  the  liquor  traffic  in  Maine,  and  1 have  no  hesitation  iu  say- 
ing that  the  beer  trade  is  not  more  than  one  T>6r  cent,  of  what  I re- 
member it  to  have  been,  and  the  trade  in  distilled  liquors  is  not  more 
than  ten  per  cent,  of  what  it  formerly  was.  Where  liquor  is  sold  at 
all,  it  is  done  secretly,  through  fear  of  the  law.” 

Fifteen  clergymen,  pastors  of  Free  Baptist  churclies  m different 
parts  of  the  State  of  Maine,  unite  in  the  statement,  1872,  that  “the 
liquor  traffic  i.s  very  greatly  diminished  under  the  repressive  power  of 
the  Maine  Law.” 

The  Rev.  A.  Dalton,  Rector  of  St.  Stephen’s  Protestant  Episcopal 
Church  of  Portland,  writing  of  the  results  of  the  Maine  Law,  June, 
1873,  says : “ Many,  iu  the  humble  classes  of  society  particularly,  have 
correct  views,  and  form  good  resolutions,  which  they  carry  out  suc- 
cessfully when  not  solicited  to  drink  by  the  open  bar.  Many  wives 
have  assured  me  of  the  improved  condition  of  their  families  through 
the  greater  restraints  put  u]>on  their  husbands.  Families,  whose 
homes  are  in  drinking  neighborhoods,  or  in  streets  where  formerly 
were  many  drunken  brawls,  have  gratefully  acknowledged  the  happy 
change  wrought  by  the  due  administration  of  the  law  suppressing 
tippling-shops.” 

The  Hon.  G.  G.  Stacy,  Secretary  of  State,  Hon.  B.  B.  Murray,  Ad- 
jutant-General, Hon.  J.  J.  Eveleth,  Mayor  of  Augusta,  and  Joshua 


THE  RESULTS  OP  PROHIBITION. 


s 


Nye,  Esq.,  late  State  Constable,  unite,  1872,  in  the  following:  “II 
we  were  to  say  that  the  quantiiy  of  liquors  sold  here  [AugustaJ  is  not 
one-tenth  so  large  as  formerly,  we  think  it  would  be  within  the 
truth  ; and  the  favorable  effects  of  the  change  upon  all  the  interests 
of  the  State  are  plainly  seen  everywhere.” 

The  Overseers  of  the  Poor  of  Portland,  Hon.  John  Bradford,  Chair- 
man, unite,  1872,  in  saying  : “ If  liquor-shops  exist  at  all  in  this  city, 
(t  is  with  secrecy  and  great  caution,  and  the  same  thing  is  true  gene- 
tally  throughout  the  iState.  The  favorable  effect  of  this  policy  is 
rery  evident,  particularly  in  the  department  of  pauperism  and  crime  ; 
while  the  population  of  the  city  increases,  pauperism  and  crime 
diminish  ; and  in  the  department  of  the  police,  the  number  of  arrests 
and  commitments  is  very  much  less  than  formei-ly.” 

These  important  testimonies,  addressed  to  Hon.  Neal  Dow,  and 
others  of  like  import,  which  we  have  not  space  to  quote,  are  conclu- 
sive that  Prohibition  is  not  a failure  in  Maine. 

General  Dow,  w'ho  is  known  as  “ the  father  of  the  Maine  law,” 
himself  corroborates  these  testimonies.  In  1853,  he  wrote  : “At  the 
time  of  the  enactment  of  the  law,  rumselling  was  carried  on  openly 
in  all  parts  of  the  State.  In  Portland,  there  were  between  three  and 
four  hundred  rum-shops,  and  immediately  after  the  enactment  of  the 
law,  not  one.  The  wholesale  trade  in  liquors  was  at  once  annihilated. 
In  Portland,  large  numbers  of  men  were  reformed.  Temptations  to 
intemperance  were  in  a great  measure  removed  out  of  the  path  of  the 
and  inexperienced.” 


‘‘Tire  last  report  of  the  Attorney-General  of  Maine,”  says  the 
Lewiston  Journal,  “ gives  us  some  interesting  statistics  of  the  de- 
grease of  crime  in  this  State  growing  out  of  prohibition  and  its  en- 
forcement. During  the  year  1866,  the  prison,  jail,  and  reform-school 
received  204  criminals.  The  number  sentenced  in  1867  was  157  ; in 
1868,  114  ; in  1869,  189  ; in  1870,  150  ; in  1871,  152  ; and  in  1872,  only 
100.  Estimating  the  average  of  commitments  for  the  seven  years 
under  review,  we  find  it  152.  This  result  indicates  the  remarkable 
fact  that  the  crime  during  the  last  year  (1872,  in  which  the  reform 
movement  has  gone  hand-in-hand  with  prohibition)  is  thirty-three 
per  cent,  less  than  the  average  of  the  last  seven  years.  It  should  be 
noticed,  moreover,  that  the  number  convicted  and  sentenced  last  year 
is  fifty  per  cent,  less  than  in  1866,  and  thirty-three  per  cent,  less  than 
In  1871.” 

What  license,  liquor-selling  State,  of  equal  population,  can  present 
as  good  an  exhibit  ? 


VINEIiA-NDj  NEW  JERSEY, 


One  of  the  best  illustrations  of  the  practical  workings  of  prohibi- 
tion is  the  Vineland  tract,  in  New  Jersey.  The  settlement  of  this 
tract  began  in  1861.  It  numbers  now,  1873,  something  ove:'  10,500 
inhabitants.  In  1864,  by  a special  act  of  the  Legislature,  the  citizens 
were  empowered  to  vote  upon  license  or  no  license.  From  the  begin- 
ning of  the  settlement,  in  1861,  no  traffic  in  alcoholic  beverages  had 
been  allowed.  A very  large  preponderance  of  the  votes  have  uni- 
formly been  given  for  ‘ ‘ no  license.”  Vineland  has,  therefore,  never 
had  an  open  grog-shop.  The  population  consists  of  manufacturers  and 
business  people  upon  the  town-plot,  and  of  farmers  and  fruit-growers 
outside  the  village  limits,  gathered  from  different  parts  of  the  United 
S^tes,  from  Germany,  Prance,  England,  Ireland,  Scotland,  and  Italy. 
At  the  invitation  of  the  New  Jersey  Temperance  Alliance,  Hoa. 
Charles  K.  Landis,  the  founder  of  Vineland,  delivered  an  address 
before  the  Judiciary  Committee  of  the  ‘House  of  Assembly,  1873, 
from  which  we  quote  coucerniug  the  statistics  of  police  and  poor  ex 
peases  of  Vineland  for  a period  of  six  years 


THE  REStrLTS  OP  PBOHIBITIOJr. 


FOLICE  EHPKNSES. 

1687 |60  00 

1S68 50  00 

1869  75  00 

1870  75  00 

1871* 150  00 

1872  25  00 


POOR  EXPEIWM. 

1867  tMO  0« 

1868  425  00 

1869  426  00 

1870  350  00 

1871* 400  00 

1872  350  00 

• This  was  the  year  when  the  Vineland  Railway  was  ballding  through  tL« 
ffiace. 


Mr.  Landia  aaya  : “ These  figures  speak  for  themselves,  but  they 
are  not  all.  There  is  a material  and  industrial  prosperity  existing 
Lb  Vineland  which,  though  I say  it  myself,  is  unexampled  in  the  his- 
tory of  colonization,  and  must  be  due  to  more  than  ordinary  causes. 
The  influence  of  temperance  upon  the  health  and  industry  of  her 
people  is  no  doubt  the  principal  of  these  causes.  Started  when  the 
country  was  plunged  in  civil  war,  its  progress  was  continually  on- 
ward. Young  us  the  settlement  was,  it  sent  its  quota  of  men  to  the 
field,  and  has  paid  over  s^GO.OOO  of  war  debts.  The  settlement  has 
built  twenty  fine  school-houses,  ten  churches,  and  kept  up  one  of  the 
finest  systems  of  road  improvements,  covering  178  miles,  in  this 
country.  There  are  now  some  fifteen  manufacturing  establishments 
on  the  Vineland  tract,  and  they  are  constantly  increasing  in  number. 
Her  stores  in  extent  and  building  will  rival  any  other  place  in  South 
dersey.  There  are  seventeen  miles  of  railroad  upon  the  tract,  em- 
bracing six  railway  stations.  The  amount  of  products  sent  away  to 
market  is  enormous.  The  poorest  of  her  people  seek  to  make  their 
homes  beautiful.” 

In  the  light  of  the  foregoing,  it  is  quite  apparent  that  in  Vineland, 
where  it  has  been  fairly  tried,  prohibition  is  not  a failuek. 


GREELEY,  COLORADO. 

A more  recent  colony,  not  yet  four  years  old,  founded  upon  tempe- 
rance principles,  with  a perpetual  proviso  against  the  liquor  traffic, 
is  Greeley,  Colorado.  Like  Vineland,  it  has  a miscellaneous  popula- 
tion,.about  3,000,  and  Ls  rapidly  i-ncreasing  in  numbers.  Efforts  have 
from  time  to  time  been  made  to  introduce  the  sale  of  alcoholic  beve- 
rages, but  with  little  success.  Not  long  after  the  colony  was  founded, 
a fair  was  held,  and  the  proceeds  ($01)  put  into  a fund  for  the  poor. 
Two  years  and  a half  afterwards  there  still  remained  of  this  fund 
nnappropriated  and  with  no  calls  therefor,  .$84.  Meanwhile,  several 
churches,  Presbyterian,  Baptist,  Methodist,  and  Episcopal,  three 
schools,  two  banks,  several  extensive  stores,  two  weekly  journals  and 
one  monthly,  and  two  literary  societies,  have  been  established,  and 
Bre  in  a flourishing  'ondition.  N.  C.  Meeker.  Esq.,  of  the  Greeley 
Ti'ib’ine,  projector  t the  colony,  writes.  Sept.,  1873  : “ No  liquor  is 
Bold  in  the  town  nor  on  the  colony  domain.  A rum-shop  was  started 
the  first  year,  and  it  was  burned  down  in  broad  daylight.  A few 
months  ago  one  %vas  opened  five  miles  from  town,  and  one  night  all 
the  liquor  was  destroyed.” 

Prohibition  in  Greeley  also,  as  in  Vineland,  is,  so  far,  a decided 
eecoosa, 

PROHIBITION  THE  TRUE  POLICY. 

The  facts  we  have— cited  demonstrate  that  the  prohibition  of  th« 
liquor  traffic  is  as  practicable  as  the  legal  repression  of  any  other  form 
of  crime.  May  it  speedily  become  the  legislative  policy  of  both  th# 
State  and  National  Governments  ! 

S^OBLISHED  BY  ThE  N-YTIDNAL  TeJIPERANCE  SOCIETY  AND  P?!®- 
No.  58  Keade  Street,  New 
AT  $3  PER  Thousand. 


No.  122. 


UW  AS  AN  EDUCATOR. 

BY  KEY.  WM.  M.  THAYER. 


T is  a false  opinion  that  moral  suasion  only  can  educate  pub- 
lic sentiment  on  the  temperance  question,  and  Hft  it  to  the 
desired  standard.  It  is  impossible  to  nurture  public  senti- 
ment, and  make  it  strong  and  reliable,  without  law.  Law  ia 
an  educator  as  truly  as  the  Gospel.  Indeed,  government, 
which  is  a system  of  indispensable  laivs,  is  a part  of  the 
New  Testament  plan  to  create  and  nurture  public  sentiment  on  every 
vital  subject.  Civil  government  is  divinely  appointed  as  really  as  the 
church.  The  minister  of  state  acts  for  God  and  humanity  as  really  aa 
the  minister  of  the  church.  Government  demands  obedience,  and  so 
does  the  Gospel.  The  church  and  civil  government  are  mutually  depen- 
dent God  meant  that  they  should  be  used  together ; and  the  man  or 
minister  who  undertakes  to  divorce  them,  and  to  use  moral  suasion 
alone,  is  docmed  to  disappointment.  He  attempts  to  accomplish  with 
one  what  God  designed  should  be  accomplished  with  hoth,  so  that  failura 
is  inevitable. 

“ Let  every  soul  be  subject  unto  the  higher  powers.  . . . "WIioso 
ever  resisteth  the  power  resisteth  the  ordinance  of  God.  . . . For 
rulers  are  not  a teiTor  to  good  works,  but  to  the  evil.  . . . For 
he  is  the  minister  of  God  to  thee  for  good.  But  if  thou  do  that  which  ia 
evil,  be  afraid  ; for  he  beareth  not  the  sword  in  vain ; for  he  is  the  min- 
ister of  God ; a revenger  to  execute  wrath  upon  him  that  doeth  evil.”— 
Kom.  xiii.  1-4. 

The  history  of  the  temperance  reform  proves  that  every  attempt  to 
educate  public  sentiment  by  moral  suasion  alone  has  failed.  1.  The 
fathers  failed  previous  to  1832.  They  did  not  evoke  the  aid  of  law. 
They  accomplished  much  for  a time;  but  soon  found  that  rumsellers 
would  destroy  faster  than  they  could  build  up.  They  were  compelled 
to  legislate.  2.  Tne  “Washingtonians  attempted  to  triumph  by  moral 
suasion  only ; and  they  came  out  of  the  contest  prohibitionists.  Moral 
appeals  would  yield  better  fruit  by  closing  the  grog-shops.  3.  The 
Father  Mathew  movement  reached  a certain  point,  and  stopped ; and 
the  author  of  it  wrote  to  the  Secretary  of  the  United  Kingdom  Alliance: 
“ I rejoice  at  the  formation  of  your  society  in  the  suppression  of  this 
monster  gorged  with  human  gore.”  4.  The  recent  Reform  Club  move- 
ment of  Majne,  under  which  more  than  twenty  thousand  hard  drinken 
have  signed  the  pledge,  started  on  the  basis  of  moral  suasion ; bat,  al 


f 


LAW  AS  AN  KDCrCATOB. 


the  expiration  of  one  and  a half-years,  the  members  entered  the  contest 
for  a prohibitory  governor  and  legislature  as  absolately  necessary  to  the 
success  of  their  cause.  Ex-Congressman  Frye,  State  Attorney  oY  Maine 
for  ten  years,  said  of  the  prohibitory  law : “ It  has  gradually  created  a 
public  sentiment  against  both  selling  and  drinldng,  so  that  the  large 
majority  of  moderate,  respectable  drinkers  have  become  abstainers,” 
He  adds:  “ Ho  law  will  enforce  itself,  but,  if  enforced,  its  tendency  is 
create  pvhlic  sentiment.”  5.  The  Reform  Clubs  of  Massachusetts  aud 
Connecticut,  commenced  on  the  rnoral  suasion  plan,  now  heartily  sup- 
nort  prohibition. 

Thus  every  mere  moral  suasion  effort  has  demonstrated  its  weakness 
without  the  aid  of  law.  The  reason  is  obvious.  With  the  necessaries 
of  life,  the  demand  creates  the  supply.  The  lumber-dealer’s  business 
enlarges  as  the  population  increases.  So  of  the  business  of  the  boot 
manufacturer  or  clothier.  But  with  the  luxtiries  of  life,  the  rule  is 
reversed  —the  supply  creates  the  demand.  A load  of  melons  carried 
into  a village  creates  a demand  for  them.  A load  of  rum  creates  a 
demand  for  it.  The  rum-shop  that  docs  a small  business  this  year  does 
a larger  one  next  year,  because  old  customers  drink  more  liquor  the 
second  year  than  they  did  the  first,  and  new  customers  are  added. 
Hence,  prohibitory  legislation  is  necessary  to  cut  off  the  supply,  the 
traffic.  All  the  moral  suasion  possible  cannot  remove  the  demand  so 
long  as  the  supply  continues  ; aud  law  only  can  stop  the  supply.  How, 
as  men  accept  this  fact,  and  seek  to  educate  public  sentiment  accord- 
ingly, will  public  sentiment  be  improved.  The  prescribed  course  of  edu- 
cation is  inevitable,  growing  out  of  the  nature  of  man  and  the  absolute 
requirements  of  the  moral  and  civil  government  under  which  we  live. 


Some  one  says:  “ Say  nothing  about  prohibition  or  law  until  by  moral 
evasion  you  have  educated  public  sentiment  so  that  law  will  be  en- 
forced.” Absurd!  Educate  the  public  mind  to  enforce  law  by  saying 
nothing  about  law  ! Educate  men  to  adopt  and  enforce  prohibition  by 
saying  nothing  to  them  about  prohibition ! As  well  educate  pubho 
sentiment  to  defend  liberty  by  saying  nothing  about  liberty  ! As  well 
educate  the  church  on  the  Trinity  or  any  other  doctrine  by  saying 
nothing  about  it ! 

Law  educates  downwards  as  well  as  upwards.  Public  temperance  sen- 
timent is  much  weaker  in  the  license  than  it  is  in  the  prohibitory  States. 
More  intoxicating  liquors  are  sold  per  capita  in  license  than  in  prohibi- 
tory States,  proving  that  public  sentiment  is  more  demoralized.  The 
report  of  Commissioner  Wells  for  the  year  ending  June  30,  1567,  shows 
that  the  three  prohibitorv  States  of  Massachusetts,  Maine,  and  T ermont, 
with  a population  of  2,250,000,  sold  less  than  one-third  as  much  intoxi- 
cating liquors  as  the  four  license  States  of  Hew  Jersey,  Rhode  Island, 
Maryland,  and  Wisconsin,  though  the  population  of  these  latter  States 
was  25,000  less.  California  sol  i thirteen  times  more  than  Maine,  aud  sis 
times  more  than  Massachusetts,  per  capita.  Even  in  isolated  places  the 
suppression  of  the  traffic  ensures  an  elevated  public  sentiment,  as  in 
Vineland,  Hew  Jersey.  Though  the  State  lias  a license  law,  by  special 
legislative  act.  the  voters  of  Vineland  are  allowed  to  prohibit  the  traffic- 
It  is  ten  years  since  the  town  was  incorporated,  and  under  this  wise 
provision  it  has  grown  to  a city  of  more  than  11,000  inhabitants,  witlv 


LAW  AS  AN  EDlrCATOR. 


9 


out  police  or  police  court,  jail,  house  of  correction,  almshouse,  or  lock- 
up. Moral  and  IcfcaJ  suasion  combined  L“ave  nurtured  a public  senti 
mont  that  is  irrepressible  afrainst  the  curse.  The  result  is  similar  in 
Besaorook.  Ireland.  Thoufrli  3.000  Irish  workmen  are  employed  in  the 
mills,  there  is  no  poor-house,  jail,  or  constable  needed,  because  the  pro- 
prietor prohibits  the  sale  of  intoxicating  driuks.  In  Great  Britain,  there 
are  fourteen  hundi'ed  parishes  iu  wliieh  the  landlords  take  advantage  ol 
the  act  of  Parliament  to  prevent  the  sale  of  liquors,  as  the  landlord  of 
Bessbrook  does,  and  the  result  is  no  crime  or  pauperism ; and  public 
Fcntiment  among  the  Irish  laborers  (who  in  this  country  are  distin- 
guished as  lovers  of  whiskey)  is  so  strong  and  vigorous  that  they  heartily 
support  the  present  order  of  things. 

Just  here  it  is  that  the  church  has  failed.  The  great  body  of  church 
members  preach  and  practise  total  abstinence,  and  try  to  have  others  do 
BO.  At  the  same  time,  popular  opi  ion  has  directed  that  the  church 
should  have  little  or  nothing  to  do  with  law;  as  if  legal  measures  could 
have  neither  a moral  nor  religious  use.  “ Let  m.en  of  the  world  execute 
the  laws ; let  the  chui-ch  attend  to  the  Gospel.”  This  has  been  the  too 
common  sentiment,  and  the  church  has  acted  upon  it.  The  result  is 
that,  even  in  prohibitory  States,  many  large  towns  and  cities  show  ten 
or  twenty  grog-shops,  houses  of*  ill-fame,  and  gambling-hells  to  ono 
church.  All  the  moral  sicasion  of  the  pulpits  and  churches  avails  noth- 
ing against  the  inroads  of  vice  and  crime.  A sceptic  said  to  us,  iu  a 
town  where  there  were  five  churches:  “ The  church  is  a sham.  Look  at 
this  place ; right  under  the  eaves  of  these  five  chiu'ches  are  four  billiard- 
halls,  twenty  rum-shops,  and  other  evls-to  correspond;  and  things 
growing  worse  and  worse  each  month.  IVIiat  is  the  church  forf” 
What  could  we  answer?  Sure  enough,  what  is  the  church  for,  when  it 
allows  the  devil  to  open  shops  around  its  bouses  of  worship,  that  lure 
more  persons  to  ruin  than  good  men  save  ? But  we  said  to  that  sceptic, 
‘'The  church  is  not  a sham.  The  trouble  is  that  the  members  of  these 
churches  do  not  use  the  legal  measures  that  Providence  has  provided, 
erroneously  believing  that  Christian  men  should  confine  their- labors  to 
the  ‘moral,’  and  failing  to  see  that  the  suppression  of  all  such  sources  of 
vice  and  crime  is  eminentlv  a moral  work.  All  these  places  of  vicious 
resort  exist  in  defiance  ot  indispensable  laws;  and  let  the  members  of 
these  five  churches  discharge  their  whole  duty  as  Christian  citizens,  sup- 
porting government  as  well  as  the  church,  which  is  their  bouuden  duty, 
and  all  of  these  dons  of  shame  could  be  closed  in  a single  week,  and 
such  a public  sentiment  created  against  them  as  to  render  the  reopening 
of  them  wholly  improbable.” 

That  community  is  an  illustration  of  what  is  seen  all  over  onr  land. 
Christian  men  refuse  to  use  one /livinely  appointed  agency  for  the  re- 
moval of  intemperance — viz.,  civil  government — because  they  do  not 
regard  it  “ moral.”  Let  them  see  that  good  laws  have  amoral  and  Chris- 
tian use,  whether  they  are  laws  to  suppress  gaming,  theft,  the  sa  e ot 
licentious  books  or  intoxicating  beverages,  and  tiiat  government — which, 
as  we  have  said,  is  a system  of  indispensable  laws,  being  heaven 
ordained — must  be  supported  by  Christian  men  as  really  as  the  church  , 
and  let  them  act  accordingly,  and  intemperance  might  be  swept  fr'oii 
our  land.  Christian  men,  who  believe  that  gi  vernment  is  the  ''  ordi 


4 


LAW  AS  AN  EDUCATOR. 


nance  of  God,”  are  just  the  ones  to  enforce  vrholesome  laws.  They  an 
the  last  persons  to  say,  “ I will  confine  my  efforts  to  the  ‘ moral  ’ only,” 
especially  when  the  so-called  legal  agencies  have  a moral  use.  Suppose 
other  people  should  refuse  to  employ  the  legal.  Shall  they  be  auan 
doned  f .Shall  wo  have  no  law  ? Shall  government  be  ignored!  Xot 
ss  long  as  we  have  a church  that  believes  government  is  a divine  insti- 
tution. Let  unbelievers  do  as  they  may,  Christians  are  bound,  both  by 
belief  and  covenant,  to  support  the  ruler  who  “is  a minister  of  God,  a 
revenger  to  execute  wrath  upon  him  that  doeth  evni,”  whatever  the  evU 
is  that  curses  society.  It  is  their  duty  to  vote  as  really  as  it  is  to  pray; 
to  go  to  the  political  meeting  and  ballot-box  as  really  as  to  church  ; to 
render  “ unto  Cfesar  the  things  that  are  Caesar’s”  as  really  as  “ unto  God 
the  things  that  are  God’s  ” ; and  one  is  “moral  ” as  truly  as  the  other. 
Our  Christian  obligations  embrace  our  political  duties.  We  have  no 
duties  to  discharge"chat  are  not  covered  by  our  Christian  responsibilities. 
Hence,  it  becomes  as  really  a Christian  duty  to  make  and  enforce  laws 
for  the  suppression  of  liquor-shops  as  to  persuade  men  to  sign  a pledge 
of  total  abstinence.  Indeed,  all  experience  shows  that  the  latter  cannot 
remove  intemperance  or  greatly  circumscribe  its  deadly  influence  with- 
out the  former. 

It  is  said  that  a good  temperance  law  partially  enforced  demoralizes 
public  sentiment.  It  is  not  so.  A good  law  partially  enforced  nurtures 
a better  public  sentiment  than  a bad  law  enforced.  It  is  better  to  have 
laws  to  suppress  lotteries,  gaming,  the  sale  of  vicious  literature,  and  kin- 
dred evils,  though  they  are  not  well  enforced,  than  to  have  no  laws,  or 
laws  that  license  such  ofl'ences.  A law  that  prohibits  the  sale  of  intoxi- 
eating  liquors  nurtures  a healthier  public  sentiment,  though  it  be  not 
thoroughly  enforced,  than  a license  law  does.  The  latter  demoralizes 

fublic  sentiment  by  legalizing  the  trafflc  and  making  it  respectable. 

'he  former  is  the  embodiment  of  the  moral  and  Chri.stian  sentiment  of 
the  community,  which,  in  itself,  becomes  a moral  breakwater  against 
which  the  tide  of  opposition  spends  its  force.  The  laws  that  once  sus- 
tained slavery  in  our  land  demoralized  public  sentiment,  so  that  pro- 
slavery  men  and  women  were  found  in  large  numbers  even  at  the  North  ; 
but  since  those  laws  were  abolished,  and  laws  supporting  liberty  have 
taken  their  place,  it  is  difficult  to  find  pro-slavery  men  and  won>«o  north 
»f  Mason  and  Dixon’s  line,  so  improved  is  public  sentimen'’ 

The  foregoing  exposes  the  folly  of  attempting  to  run  tt.._^<-ance  so- 
cieties on  the  basis  of  moral  suasion  alone.  It  creates  the  impression 
that  a class  of  temperance  men  repudiate  law  as  an  ally,  and  tliis 
secures  the  approbation  of  the  rumsellers  and  their  friends,  whose  appro- 
val is  evidence  that  the  method  is  wrong;  it  affords  a refuge  for  a class 
of  persons  who  want  the  reputation  of  being  temperance  men  without 
the  practice ; and  it  drags  out  of  the  dead  past  to  the  notice  of  the  un- 
initiated an  exploded  method  of  dealing  with  intemperance,  thus  embar- 
rassing instead  of  advancing  our  cause. 


PUHUISnED  BY  THE  NATIONAL  TeMPEHANCE  SOCIETY  AND  Pu» 
LIGATION  House,  No.  58  Re.^de  Street,  Nsy? 

York,  at  |3  per  Thousand. 


No.  125 


THE  RELATIONS 

ow 

DRUNKENNESS  TO  CRIME. 


K?  WVIL  HABRIS,  U:.D.,  COR.  SECRETARY  PRISON  ASSOCIATIOa 
OF  NEW  YORK. 


N the  following  statements  we  shall  employ  the  terms 
crime  and  drunkenness  precisely  as  they  would  be  em- 
ployed in  ordinary  conversation.  Not  any  one  class  of 
felonies  or  other  offences,  not  a nicely-defined  degree  of 
alcoholism  or  intoxication,  and  not  the  mania  of  an  insane 
abandonment  to  the  appetite  anu  passion  called  dipsomania,  will 
limit  the  familiar  use  of  these  well-accepted  terms — drunkenness  and 
crime. 

The  enactments  of  legislatures  do  not  create  crimes,  though  statutes 
define  some  crimes.  The  statutes  of  one  State  or  nation  define  cer- 
tain offences,  and  publicly  declare  them  to  be  crimes  ; while  other 
States  do  not  so  declare  or  even  in  any  manner  mention  them  in  the 
laws. 

The  wilful  or  avoidable  offence  against  the  laws  of  right  and  duty 
or  against  the  commands  of  God,  or  against  the  public  and  acknow- 
ledged laws  of  the  land,  may  separately  and  equally,  alone  or  alto- 
gether.  constitute  the  quality  of  criminality  of  an  act  or  a course  of 
action  ; and  this  common-sense  definition  of  criminality  is  the  accepted 
definition.  It  is  in  this  sense  of  an  intrinsic  and  positive  quality  of  an 
action,  as  well  as  in  any  particular  application  of  the  term  ciiniinality 
that  we  here  propose  to  employ  the  word  criminality. 

The  difficulty  in  giving  expression  hj  public  laws  relating  to  drunk 


s 


THE  BELATIONS  OF  DRUNKENNESS  TO  CErME. 


enness  as  we  would  mention  such  acts  crime  as  murder,  arso  a 
burglary,  or  robbery,  must  not  prevent  men  from  recognizing-  tns 
inherent  quality  of  such  voluntary  and  self-indulgent  acts  as  induce 
these  eery  crimes.  Drunkenness  being  a direct  result  of  the  misusa 
of  appetites,  with  a dangerous  and  destructive  submission  to  sensuoui 
excitement,  it  cannot  be  defined  by  any  such  simple  phraseology  as 
that  by  which  one  single  act  of  overt  violence,  malice,  or  of  continued 
injury,  may  be  expressed  ; but  the  moral  and  physical  quality  of  the 
act  of  hecoming  drunk,  and  the  quality  of  the  injuries  and  offences 
which  result  directly  from  the  drunkenness  of  any  one  who  inflicts 
violence  or  other  injurious  acts,  are  readily  understood  and  defined. 

Already,  in  all  enlightened  minds,  the  question  is  settled  that  th«< 
Intoxication  which  alcohol  produces  is  marked  by  consequences  to  the 
mind,  the  body,  the  moral  feelings,  and  the  injurious  and  dangerous 
acts  that  follow  upon  the  use  of  no  other  drug.  This  peculiar  dis 
tinction  from  all  other  poisons,  and  particularly  from  the  various 
others  that  may  produce  drunkenness,  -warrants  the  separate  consi- 
deration which  we  have  given  to  it,  and  which  the  Word  of  God  also 
gives. 

More  than  half  of  all  the  convicts  in  the  State  prisons  and  penitea- 
tiaries. voluntarily  confess  the  fact  that  they  were  intemperate  and 
frequently  drunk  previous  to  the  crimes  for  which_  they  are  impri- 
soned, and  that  such  intemperance  had  an  essential  influence  in  pre- 
paring them  for  the  acts  of  crime.  About  83  per  cent,  of  the  convicts 
In  the  United  States  privately  confess  their  frequent  indulgence  in 
Intoxicating  drinks.  The  Super-mtendc  nt  of  the  Detroit  House  of 
Correction  found  that  only  18  per  cent,  of  the  convicts  in  fifteen  State 
pr'sons  and  a large  number  of  county  jails  even  claimed  to  be  -Isem- 
perate.  This  may  be  taken  as  a fair  statement  of  percentages  of  the 
temperate  and  intemperate  in  the  prisons  and  jails  of  the  United 
States  and  Great  Britain. 

After  two  years  of  careful  enquiry  into  the  history  ana  condition  of 
the  criminal  population  of  the  State,  we  find  that  the  ccnclusion  is 
Inevitable  that,  taken  in  all  its  relations,  alcohodc  drinks  may  justly 
be  charged  with  far  more  than  half  of  the  crimes  that  are  brought  to 
conviction  in  the  State  of  New  York,  and  that  fully  85  per  cent,  of 
all  convicts  give  evidence  of  having  in  some  larger  degree  been  pie- 
pared  or  enticed  to  do  criminal  acts  because  of  the  physical  and  di»- 
tracting  effects  produced  upon  the  human  organism  by  alcohol,  and  sa 
^ey  indulged  in  the  use  of  alcoholic  drinks. 


THE  RELATIONS  OF  DRUNKEITWESS  TO  C31HE. 


9 


The  remark  of  Lord  Bacon,  “that  rrine  ia  the  most  powerful  of  aL 
'things  for  exciting  and  inflaming  the  passions  of  all  kinds,  being, 
indeed,  a common  fuel  to  them  all,”  is  verified  in  the  history  of  the 
worst  crimes  and  the  experience  of  criminals.  The  conditions  under 
which  crime  depends  so  directly  upon  drunkenness  that  the  crime 
would  not  be  or  would  not  have  been  committed,  were  not  alcoholic 
intoxication  an  antecedent,  and  in  most  cases  actually  the  essential 
preparation,  are  obvious  enough.  Yet  the  apologists  lor  crime  are 
continually  disputing  about  this  relationship.  Every  prison  in  the 
land  bears  true  testimony  on  this  subject. 

Let  us  look  at  a senes  of  recent  illustrations  of  the  nature  and 
dependence  of  the  relation  of  crime  perpetrated  under  alcoho^c 
demonism. 

During  the  present  month,  in  the  Supreme  Court  in  a rural  county 
in  this  State,  I witnessed  the  sentencing  of  three  youths  under  twen- 
ty-one years  of  age  for  the  crime  of  arson — a sentence  that  was  just 
and  timely.  Before  the  removal  of  those  young  criminals  to  prison, 
each  of  them  gave  to  me  separately  and  alone  the  following  account 
of  his  preparation,  incentive,  and  share  in  the  crime  ; the  details  and 
variations  of  the  three  statements  all  concentrated  upon  the  following 
facts  : 

Each  lad  had  during  the  last  winter  formed  the  habit  of  frequent 
drinking  for  gaiety  and  the  pleasures  of  the  early  stages  of  drunken- 
ness. They  had  frequent  sprees  together  at  a country  dram-shop  ; 
and  a few  weeks  ago,  they  became  unusually  gay  while  drinking,  and 
when  they  left  the  tippling-room,  with  the  general  purpose  to  go 
Lome,  they  reeled  onward,  discussing  the  safety  of  a theft  or  other 
mischief  they  might  perpetrate.  They  started  for  a thieving  exploit 
in  a valuable  barn  and  stable  ; and  before  they  had  matured  their  plan 
and  ensured  any  success  in  plunder,  they  set  fire  to  the  premises,  and 
were  soon  detected  and  brought  to  punishment. 

During  a period  of  eighteen  months  of  inspection  of  penitentiaries, 
jails,  and  prisons,  ending  January  1, 1873,  the  writer  conversed  pri- 
vately and  alone  with  seventeen  persons,  each  of  whom  had  wilfully 
and  intentionally  killed  a fellow-being,  and  two  of  whom  had  killed 
two  each  ; three  of  these  seventeen  murderers  are  now  in  the  lunatic 
asylum  for  the  criminal  insane,  and  of  them  no  further  mention  if 
required  in  this  place.  The  fourteen  whom  we  will  now  mention  by 
number  had  a record  as  follows  : No.  1. — A fair  and  inoffensiva- 
Bpp«aring  man,  common  education,  a religious  and  indulgent  mother, 


4 


THB  EELATIONS  OF  DRTXNKENN  ESS  TO  CRrSIE. 


and,  until  lie  began  to  indulge  in  drink,  had  an  actire  conscience 
Becretly  quarrelled  with  hia  wife  and  her  legal  adviser  to  obtain 
funds  from  her  estate  to  gratify  his  love  of  pleasure,  though  not  yet 
an  habitual  drunkard.  Being  delayed  and  teniporarilj-  obstructed  in 
his  purpose,  he  prepared  to  bring  on  an  issue  that  should  secure  the 
(sum  he  asked,  or  be  revenged.  ILe  prepared  his  rifle  for  the  latter, 
and  in  a methodical  kind  of  frenzy  killed  the  two  friends  to  whom  he 
was  already  indebted  for  ceaseless  kindness.  Sitting  with  this  mur- 
derer alone  before  his  execution,  I asked  him  how  lie  prepared  his 
nerves  and  deadened  his  manly  instincts  so  as  to  attempt  the  murder. 
“ Tell  me,”  said  1 ; “ for  I know  you  had  to  pre'pare  to  do  it.”  He 
replied  : “ I laid  in  two  quarts  of  raw  gin  ; and  during  the  ten  hours 
before  I began  the  deed,  I drank  at  five  different  times  as  much  as  1 
dare.” 

No.  2. — A powerful  but  mild-looking  man  in  middle  life  ; wayward, 
eelf-indulgent,  and  without  education ; a farmer  with  family  and 
some  estate.  Returned  from  a neighboring  village  full  of  whiskey, 
went  to  work  in  the  woodland,  and  watched  the  opportunity  to 
execute  his  fitting  design  and  wish  to  slay  the  owner  of  the  land, 
to  whom  he  owed  rents.  The  owner  came  to  him.  as  he  expected,  and 
he  clove  him  with  the  axe.  The  murderer  declared  he  could  not  have 
had  the  thought,  formed  the  purpose,  or  performed  the  fatal  act 
without  whiskey,  and  that,  sinful  as  his  life  had  been,  he  could  not 
have  had  such  thoughts  and  wishes,  nor  have  struck  the  blow,  except 
by  the  inspiration  of  whiskey.  Yet  he  was  not  obviously  drunk,  but 
hard  at  work.  He  says  there  never  was  the  least  provocation  for  his 
act. 

No.  3. — An  educated  and  pleasant  young  man,  who  had  done  hon- 
orable service  in  the  war.  yet  for  five  years  had  frequently  and  exces- 
sively indulged  in  alcoliolic  drinks,  but  had  not  lost  social  nor  busi- 
ness standing,  though  his  Itusiness  enterprises  had  resulted  in 
disaster.  After  a protracted  “ spree,”  he  ])assionately  and  unpro- 
vokedly  assaulted  an  associate,  and  killed.him;  and,  until  his  frenzy 
had  subsided,  he  had  no  C"m])u notions  or  fear.  Such  a murder  was 
in  his  case  morally  impossible,  except  as  a direct  inspiration  of  alco 
holic  intoxication.* 

• In  these  brief  outlines  of  the  circumstances  attendiiig  a se.-ies  of  ti«Tible  Crimea, 
are  do  not  bring  into  view  the  habit  of  inciiriety  in  which  ilie  parents  of  certain  of 
Lhase  criminals  are  Itnown  to  have  indulged  out  the.  fact  should  be  mentioned, 
tbat  the  writer  ascertained  in  several  of  these'  cases  that  the  father  or  motha,  a 


THB  RELATIONS  OP  DRUNKENNESS  TO  CRIME  A 

No.  4. — An  impulsive  and  well-educated  man  in  the  common  walks 
ef  life  had  conceived  a bitter  animosity  against  another,  and,  after  a 
few  days  of  mental  irritation,  he  prepared  himself  to  slay  his  secret 
enemy.  That  preparation  by  alcoholic  stimulus  rendered  him  so 
unsteady  that,  upon  meeting  an  intimate  friend  of  his  intended  vic- 
tim, he  suddenly  and  impulsively  fired  at  the  former  when  silently 
moving  in  pursuit  of  the  latter.  The  assailant  was  incapable  of  such 
a purpose,  preparation,  and  fatal  impulse  without  the  stimulus  and 
disordered  mental  effects  of  strong  drink. 

No.  5. — A jealous  husband,  after  pleading  with  his  neighbor  to 
abandon  his  friendly  relations,  undertook  to  prepare  himself  to  assail 
the  enemy  of  his  peace  ; but  to  that  preparation  he  gave  an  entire 
day  in  two  villages,  and  drank  thirty-one  glasses  of  raw  whiskey, 
which  he  knew  he  could  bear  until  he  raved  ; and  thus  prepared  he 
shot  toward  his  enemy,  but  so  widely  away  from  the  mark  that  be 
killed  a man  whom  he  regarded  with  friendly  feelings. 

No.  6. — A beardless  lad  who,  before  twenty  years  of  age,  became  a 
desperado.  Whiskey  and  low  associates  rendered  him  utterly 
desperate  at  various  times.  In  a drunken  brawl,  he  deliberately  and 
with  bravado  killed  a man  without  provocation.  When  sober,  this 
youth  was  inoffensive,  affectionate,  and  kindly  esteemed.  The  drun- 
ken sheriff  keenly  sympathized  with  the  lad,  and  at  the  farewell  visit 
of  his  released  companions  and  instigators  of  the  murder,  that  official 
permitted  them  to  bring  whiskey,  and  take  farewell  drinks,  that  the 
gallows  might  not  startle  the  culprit. 

both  parents,  were  intemperate  drinkers  at  the  earliest  recollection  of  the  prisoner, 
or  that  a proclivity  to  passionate  and  sensuous  acts  seemed  to  have  been  inherited. 

While  this  fearful  realization  of  the  fact  that  “ the  sins  of  the  parent  are  visited 
npoB  the  children,  even  to  the  third  and  fourth  generation,”  and  by  such  an  inflic- 
tion become  remote  causes  of  vice  and  crime — and  are  therefore  criminal — neither 
the  prisoners  nor  the  laws  excuse  these  terrible  crimes  by  charging  them  wholly 
upon  the  parental  inheritance.  The  still,  small  voice  of  conscience  utters  its  accur 
sation  in  the  mind  of  almost  every  criminal.  In  the  words  of  one  of  the  ablest 
physiologists,  who  has  asserted  and  explained  the  natural  law  of  hereditary  entail- 
nient  of  the  drunkarit’s  curse  to  the  family,  “Every  sane  man  is  responsible  for  bii 
voluntary  acts,  whatever  may  he  bis  moving  impulse.  Sin  and  crime  are  always 
sin  and  crime,  whatever  the  constitutional  tendency.  . . . The  vicious  act  may 
seem  to  be  due  to  irresistible  iinpulse,  but  the  perpetrator  is  not  the  less  culpacl* 
for  that.  He  who  wilfully  intoxicates  himself,  that  he  may  commit  a murder,  ia 
Btill  a murderer,  and  one  of  the  deepest  dye  of  crime.  . . . None  are  born 
with  a constitution  incapable  of  virtue,  though  many  have  such  a one  as  may  weU 
make  life  one  long  struggle  against  the  power  of  temptations  so  severe  that  itia  well 
for  man  that  he  is  not  left  alone  in  the  mortal  conflict.” 


t THE  RELATIONS  OF  DRUNKENNESS  TO  CBIHB. 

No.  7. — A woman,  after  laboring  in  a jovial  company  all  day,  occ3k 
•ionally  sipping  some  crude  wbi.¥key,  returned  to  her  drunken  hue- 
band,  and  in  a weird  frenzy  marched  back  and  forth  near  the  window 
of  their  dwelling  until  she  saw  the  man  was  asleep  ; then  she  entered 
the  apartment,  and  clove  his  head  with  an  axe.  She  recounted  to  me 
the  strange  fancies  and  reasons  that  filled  her  mind  during  the  hour 
she  waited  for  that  sleep  that  should  permit  her  to  execute  her  pur- 
pose. At  the  time  of  that  conversation,  and  even  before,  she  waa 
fearfully  sane.  She  said  she  never  tasted  spirits  except  to  keep  her 
ccrurage  and  hopes  alive.  She  was  an  uneducated  American  of 
decent  manners. 

No.  8. — A young  man,  of  respectable  family,  deliberately  killed 
his  wife,  with  whom  he  was  living  unhappily  ; but  for  days  previ- 
ously to  the  murder,  he  drank  freely,  and  was  under  the  influence  of 
whiskey  when  he  struck  her  down  without  warning  as.  she  passed 
him  while  he  was  preparing  fire  for  their  breakfast.  He  told  ma 
that  the  idea  of  taking  her  life  had  not  been  definitely  formed  in  his 
mind,  but,  being  terribly  confused  and  astray  in  his  thoughts  he 
acted  destructively  and  ■without  plan  or  conception  of  the,  conse- 
quences. Collateral  evidence  has  proved  that  this  was  true. 

Nos.  9, 10,  11,  12,  and  13. — Five  men,  in  a single  remote  county  in 
this  State,  have  separately  given  me  at  different  visits  the  following 
account  of  the  relation  of  intoxicating  drinks  to  tiieir  crimes.  From 
the  courts  and  other  sources  I have  adequately  confirmed  the  correct 
ness  of  their  statements : 

No.  9. — A man  of  middle  age,  with  habits  of  command  as  a master- 
■workman  and  contractor,  had  passed  to  the  ninth  day  in  one  of  hia 
monthly  “ sprees  ” While  walking  in  a busy  street,  in  which  even 
the  houses  and  pavements  seemed  moving,  he  assailed  and  instantly 
killed  a shopkeeper  at  his  own  door.  A stranger  to  his  victim,  and 
an  enemy  to  no  living  being,  he  murdered  without  provocation.  He 
told  me,  after  his  sentence,  he  would  be  glad  if  execution  could  expi- 
ate the  crime  and  that  the  wonder  tvas  he  had  not  done  some  dread- 
ful deed  before  ; for  these  terrible  impulses  had  made  him  afiaid  •f 
himself  when  recovering  from  his  " sprees." 

No.  10. — A stolid  man,  with  conscience  and  compassion  as  silent  aa 
the  grave,  killed  his  own  cousin,  merely  for  more  money  to  buy  beer. 
Wife,  children,  and  home  affections  had  died  out  in  his  heart,  though 
his  wife  and  childreiA  tried  to  save  him.  He  was  neither  imbecile 
Bar  insane,  yet  could  murder  any  person  to  obtain  further  means  of 


THE  KBLATIOSTS  OF  DRUNKENNESS  TO  CBIIfE. 


9 


Indulgence.  He  once  carried  on  a large  mechanical  husinese,  and 
had  manly  instincts  and  character  until  he  succumbed  to  the  stupoi 
of  drink. 

No.  ll. — A young  man,  with  wife  and  children,  deliberately  shot 
and  killed  a comrade,  firing  three  times  with  excited  bravado.  Ha 
gloried  in  “ sprees,”  and  was  proud  of  his  powers  in  gay  drinking, 
revelry,  and  profanitj'.  But  when  I parted  with  him  after  his  sen- 
tence, he  begged  me  to  see  his  beautiful  cu'ld,  and  he  evinced  the 
gentlest  sentiments  and  emotions  concerning  the  wife  and  children. 

No.  12. — Killed  his  mother.  He  was  a young  man  who  could  be 
fired  by  a small  quantity  of  alcoholic  stimuli  to  do,  upon  impulse, 
any  desperate  act,  but,  when  sober,  would  not  harm  a dog.  Yet 
when  not  so  drunk  as  to  be  unsteady-handed,  he  thrust  a huge  knife 
through  his  mother’s  body  immediately  upon  her  refusal  to  give  him 
more  money  for  drink. 

No.  13. — A drunken  farm  laborer  transacted  business  for  his  em- 
ployer in  town,  drank  freely,  and,  when  returning  home  at  evening, 
assaulted  an  inoffensive  woman,  whipped  and  finally  killed  the  poor 
creature,  dragged  the  corpse  into  a school-house,  and  there  cut  and 
mangled  it,  as  though  infuriated  with  diabolical  frenzy.  He  told  me 
he  was  so  infuriated,  and  that  for  years  he  had  been  losing  his  self- 
control  after  drinking.  But  in  this  instance,  “ the  terrible  effects 
came  on  before  he  got  home — the  roads  were  so  bad.”  He  expected 
to  have  reached  his  lodgings  before  he  was  so  far  gone. 

No.  14. — S , aged  30,  a farmer  of  some  fortune,  and  who  in  the 

past  few  years  was  in  the  habit  of  dram-drinking  once  or  twice  a 
week  when  visiting  the  country  town  near  by.  A few  glasses  of 
whiskey  or  mixed  liquors  usually  rendered  him  wild.  On  one  of 
these  occasions,  he  imagined  himself  insulted  by  numerous  bystand- 
ers at  the  door  of  the  dram-shop,  and  in  his  fury  he  dashed  at  one, 
and  instantly  killed  him  with  a knife,  and  seriously  injured  others. 
He  is  a pleasant  and  sensible  man  when  sober,  and,  in  reply  to  my 
enquiry  concerning  the  actual  nature  of  his  offence,  he  said  : “ Sir, 
it  is  the  gravest  crime  I am  accused  of — nothing  less  than  killing  & 
fellow-man  who  had  not  wronged  me.”  Deep  anguish  and  the  full 
consciousness  of  his  criminality  for  being  guilty  of  such  an  act,  and 
for  having  been  drunk  at  the  time,  were  unmistakable  in  this  man's 
SuiiVersaiion  and  manners. 

Let  these  instances  of  terrible  crimes  with  which  society  is  coa- 
^nually  alilicted  sutBce  to  show  precisely  what  part  the  demon  alco 


6 


THE  RELATIONS  OR  DRUNKENNESS  TO  CBIltX. 


hol  plays  in  the  murders,  arsons,  and  nameless  outrages  that  sho^ 
(he  public  ear  and  send  thrills  of  horror  throughout  the  stale.  En- 
raged tigers  and  hideous  vipers  could  roam  our  streets  more  safely 
than  kuman  beings  so  poisoned  and  crazed  by  strong  drink. 

In  France,  it  is  an  ascertained  fact  that  about  31)  per  cent,  of  all 
Biurders  are  perpetrated  amidst  drunken  brawls  in  or  about  dram- 
shops. In  Great  Britain  and  the  United  States,  the  percentage  ii 
still  greater,  exceeding  50  per  cent. ; while  among  the  convicts  in 
prisons  and  penitentiaries  in  both  these  countries,  over  75  per  cent 
of  the  prisoners  were  addicted  to  inebriation,  before  imprisonment, 
and  nearly  or  quite  half  of  the  total  number  committed  their  crimes 
when  in  some  degree  under  the  poisonous  influence  of  alcoholic 
drinks. 

The  history  of  crimes  that  are  committed  against  the  person,  such 
as  those  here  narrated,  sufficiently  illustrate  the  conditions  under 
which  the  conscience  and  reason  become  silent,  and  the  rule  of 
diabolism*  is  established.  Even  the  educated  and  socially  favored 
man  is  in  great  danger  of  falling  into  any  kind  of  vice — irregularity 
in  duty,  departure  from  business,  integrity,  and  even  the  commission 
of  crimes — if  he  indulges  freely  in  intoxicating  drinks.  The  pri- 
sons and  the  courts,  as  well  as  the  history  of  banking  and  mercan- 
tile pursuits,  and  the  great  enterpri.-ses  of  commerce  and  industry, 
prove  this.  The  fact  is  here  to  be  declared  boldli/  that  the  intoxicat- 
ing effect  of  alcohol  prepares  the  way  for  the  commission  of  crimes 
of  every  kind,  and  that  even  for  those  which  require  a steady  hand 
and  a clear  head  there  is  need  of  the  paralyzing  effect  of  the  alcohol 
upon  the  conscience  and  moral  sense  ; and  that  such  an  effect  is 
desired  and  sought  by  the  professional  criminal  is  a fact  well  known. 
It  is  also  an  important  fact  that  the  unpremeditated  or  gradual  sliding 
into  fraudulent  and  criminal  practices  by  persons  who  surprise  soci- 
ety by  their  fall  is  largely  due  to  the  demoralizing  effects  of  alcohol 
upon  the  conscience,  and  the  normal  liold  of  moral  principles  upoE 
the  mind  and  the  daily  affairs  of  men. 


rVEUSHED  BY  The  Nation.al  Temperance  Society  and 
ucATioN  House,  No.  58  Reade  Street,  Net*' 
York,  at  $6  PEm  Thous^vnd. 


No.  135. 

Constitutionality  and  Duty  of  Prohibition. 

BY  REV.  H.  M.  SCUDDER,  D.D. 


HE  prevalence  of  intemperance  can  be  made  V6T  palpable  by  a few 
facts.  The  bill  that  intemperance  presents  every  year  to  tha 
Amej’ican  people,  and  which  is  paid  down  in  hard  cash,  is  raora 
than  twelve  hundred  millions  of  dollars.  Two  such  receipted 
bills  w(juld  abolish  our  national  debt  and  leave  us  a surplus.  If 
you  could  build  a bank  big  enough  to  hold  it  all,  and  should  begin 
to  pay  out  this  money  at  th©  rate  of  twenty-five  thousand  dollar* 
a day,  it  would  take  you  one  hundred  and  thirty  years  to  do  it. 
So  that,  if  you  were  a cashier,  and  you  should  count  thirty  years  to  a genera- 
tion, you  might  bequeath  the  business  to  your  son,  and  he  to  your  grandson, 
and  he  to  your  great-grandson,  and  the  great-great-grandson  would  have  ten 
years  before  the  payment  would  bo  completed.  From  careful  statistics,  it  is 
calculated  that  half  a mUlion  of  men  are  engaged  in  the  liquor-traffic  in  the 
Cnited  States.  That  is  a standing  army  of  intemperance  five  hundred  thou- 
sand strong. 

The  prevalence  of  intemperance  can  be  still  further  demonstrated  by  the 
wretchedness  of  seven  hundred  and  fifty  thousand  drunkards,  by  the  destitu- 
tion of  eight  hundred  thousand  paupers,  and  by  the  ravings  and  the  imbecili- 
ties of  thirty  thousand  madmen  and  idiots.  Now,  I say  that  is  a woful  arith- 
metic. These  figures  affect  us  as  astronomical  distances  affect  us  ; they  failto 
originate  in  us  any  adequate  conception  of  their  magnitude.  We  are  paralyzed 
at  the  very  contemplation.  The  brain  is  conscious  of  its  inability  to  realize 
such  numbers  as  a shock  to  its  whole  substance,  and  the  heart  responds  to  the 
conviction  of  the  brain,  and  is  paralyzed  in  every  fibre.  But  one  impression  is 
burned  into  our  very  souls,  and  that  is  this — that  these  figures  and  the  facts 
which  they  do  represent  set  before  us  in  a most  appaJling  manner  the  preva- 
lence of  intemperance.  Now,  if  it  is  so  prevalent,  and  if  it  is  an  evU,  then  how 
reat  an  evil  it  must  be  1 Let  me  run  over  for  a moment  a few  points  very 
riefly. 

Intemperance  creates  in  man  an  ungovernable  appetite.  You  and  1,  thank 
God,  not  having  been  drunkards,  cannot  tell  what  it  is.  Men  who  have  fallen 
have  told  us  it  is  not  a desire,  not  an  appetite,  not  a passion  ; these  ordinary 
words  fail  to  express  the  thing.  It  is  more  like  a raging  storm  that  pervades 
the  entire  being ; it  is  a madiness  that  paralyzes  the  brain  ; it ’s  a corrosion 
that  gnaws  the  stomach  ; it  is  a storm-fire  that  courses  through  the  veins  ; it 
transgresses  every  boundary,  it  fiercely  casts  aside  every  barrier,  it  regards  no 
motive,  it  silences  reason,  it  stifles  conscience,  it  tramples  upon  prudence,  it 
overleaps  everything  that  you  choose  to  put  in  its  way,  and  eternal  life  and  the 
claims  of  God  are  as  feathers  which  it  blows  out  of  its  path.  Really,  a drunk- 
ard would  sell  bis  body  and  soul,  would  barter  away  heaven,  and  covenant  with 
you  to  jump  into  hell,  if  you  would  give  him  what  he  asks — more  drink. 

What  does  it  do  to  a man’s  body  ? It  diseases  it ; it  crazes  his  brain,  it 
nlasts  his  nerves,  it  consumes  his  liver,  it  destroys  his  stomach,  it  inflames  his 
heart,  it  sends  a fiery  flood  of  conflagration  through  all  the  tissues  ; it  so  saps 
the  recuperative  energies  of  man’s  body  that  oftentimes  a little  scratch  upon  a 
drunkard’s  skin  is  a greater  injury  than  a bayonet-thrust  through  and  through 
the  body  of  a temperate  man.  It  not  only  does  this,  but  the  ruin  that  it  brings 
into  the  nervous  system  often  culminates  in  delirium  tremens.  Now,  I am  a 
physician  as  well  as  a clergyman.  I have  seen  the  delirium  tremens.  Have  you 
seen  it  ? Have  you  ever  seen  a man  under  its  influence  ? Have  you  heard  him 
mutter,  and  jabber,  and  leer,  and  rave  like  an  idiot  ? Have  you  heard  Mm 
moan,  cry,  shriek,  curse,  and  rave,  as  he  tried  to  skulk  under  the  bedclothes  f 
Have  you  looked  into  hts  eyes,  and  seen  the  horrors  of  the  damned  there  f 
Have  you  witnessed  -.h— e things  ? Have  you  seen  the  scowl  on  his  face,  so  that 
the  whole  atmespnere  was,  filled  with  tempest  ? Have  you  seen  him  heave  on 
his  bod,  as  though  his  body  was  undulating  upon  the  rolling  waves  like  a fire  f 
If  you  have,  then  you  know  what  it  does  to  the  body. 

Look  at  the  will.  It  enthralls  the  will.  A man’s  wUl  ought  to  be  king.  The 
will  of  the  drunkard  is  an  abject  slave.  The  noblest  and  the  mlghtie.‘=t  m^B 
have  been  unable  to  break  off  the  chain  when  it  is  once  rive.,ed.  I verily  be- 
li.i  ve  there  have  been  no  such  wails  of  despair  out  of  hell  itself  as  have  gone  up 
from  the  Ups  and  heart  of  the  drunkard  who  knew  he  never  could  be  reeo 
Tered. 

What  does  it  do  to  the  heart  f If  a man  is  made  in  the  image  of  God’s  In- 
teUect,  a woman  is  made  in  the  image  of  God’s  heart.  A tender  woman  is  ten- 
derest  to  her  child.  Is  there  anything  that  can  unmother  a woman,  that  ooa 
plnok  tfee  ui^temal  heart  out,  of  her,  and  put  in  its  place  somethlug  that  is  pov- 


2 


C0N8TITUTI0KALITT  AND  DUTY  OF  PKOHIBITIOK 


erfal  and  fiendish  ? There  was  a woman  tried  in  England  for  this.  She  wa* 
drunk  ; she  was  drinking  up  all  she  had  ; she  wanted  more  ; she  had  pawned 
everything,  and  she  did  not  know  what  to  do.  Finally,  her  eyes  feU  upon  her 
boy — a fine  boy  that  she  had.  He  had  on  a pair  of  hoots.  She  seized  him, 
threw  him  down,  and,  in  her  effort  to  puU  them  off,  the  boy  resisted,  and  she. 
In  her  drunken  fury,  forgetting  that  that  was  the  boy  she  had  brought  into  the 
world  and  had  suckled  and  had  watched  over,  threw  him  out  of  the  third-story 
window  on  the  pavement.  I ask  if  there  is  any  other  agent  on  earth,  or  even 
in  the  world  of  the  damned,  that  can  so  transform  a mother's  heart  into  some- 
thing for  vrhioh  thought  itself  cannot  find  similitude  ? I say  Satan  himself  can- 
not Clo  it ; but  rum  can  do  it,  and  did  it  in  this  case. 

Look  ai  character.  It  wrecks  character.  It  is  a double  shipwreck  ; the 
drunkard  not  only  loses  his  ovm  respect,  but  he  loses  the  respect  of  everybody 
else.  His  own  character,  with  its  real  worthiness  and  with  its  reputation,  la 
gone,  and  his  worthiness  in  the  estimation  of  other  people  is  gone  too — both  ol 
them,  slain,  are  buried  in  one  grave  ; and  the  grave-digger  and  the  murderer, 
who  are  they  ? Rum.  It  wipes  out  the  likeness  of  (jod  from  the  soul,  and 
makes  a man  a mixture  of  the  brute  and  the  demon,  evolving  the  stupidity  cl 
the  one  and  the  piiilosophy  of  the  other  ; .and  the  Bible  tells  us  that  no  drunk- 
ard shall  ever  inherit  the  kingdom  of  God. 

It  brings  a peculiar  curse  upon  woman.  I say  intemperance  brings  a pecu- 
liar curse  upon  woman.  It  reverses  the  very  order  of  life.  Man  is'hot  natu- 
rally cruel  to  woman  : that  is  not  his  disposition.  TVhen  man  came  out  of 
Paradise,  he  came  out  with  a woman,  hand  in  hand  with  her.  That  nature  was 
to  her  a true  nature  ; it  was  significant  of  the  fact  that  courtesy  to  woman  had 
outlived  the  fall.  There  is  a second  serpent  that  tempts  man.  It  is  intempe- 
rance. It  betrays  him  into  a lower  fall.  1 ask,  who  is  it  that  vilifies  the  woman 
whom  he  has  married  and  sworn  to  protect  ? Who  is  it  that  defiles  her  pure 
presence  with  the  obscenity  of  the  slum  and  the  saloon  ? Who  strikes  her  fair 
face  ? Who  starves  her,  body  and  soul  ? Who  sells  her  marriage  vosiure  and 
her  wedding  jewels  ? Who  plunges  into  her  breast  the  murderou''  icnife  ? How 
is  it  that  man  is  brought  iuto  condition  to  do  these  things  ? It  is  only  one 
agency  that  can  do  it— rum. 

What  shall  we  say  of  the  social  iniquity  that  has  grown  so  great,  even  in 
New  York  City  ? There  are  streets  through  which  your  childreu  cannot  safely 
go  to  school— through  which  they  cannot  go  without  hearing  obscenities  .•’nd 
witnessing  sights  suited  to  contaminate  their  innocent  souls.  What  is  th« 
stimulus  and  inducement  to  that  iniquity  ? It  is  rum. 

Lastly,  it  breeds  crime,  fills  our  prisons,  penitentiaries,  houses  of  correc- 
tion, and'houses  of  tll-famo.  It  feasts  the  thought  of  robbery,  makes  it  appeal 
feasible,  promises  it  immunity  ; it  nourishes  the  conception  of  murder,  and 
gives  courage  to  the  shrinking  murderer  ; it  is  the  thief 's  cunning  ; it  is  the 
forger’s  emboldener  ; it  is  the  assassin’s  inspiration  ; it  is  the  strength  of  the 
seducer  ; it  is  the  wea’iness  of  the  seduced  ^ it  nerves  the  suicide  ; it  impels 
every  year  myriads  of  men  and  women  across  the  boundaries  of  virtue  into 
the  territories  of  brutal  vice  and  hopeless  guilt.  If  there  is  any  atrocious  evil 
to  be  perpetrated,  the  man  who  expects  to  perpetrate  it  brings  himself  up  to 
the  work  by  strong  drink.  It  is  stronger  than  the  devil  liimseif — stronger  to 
lead  men  into  all  prolligacy,  into  all  pollution  and  all  crime. 

Now,  what  shall  we  do  about  it  ? Shall  we  1 ’t  it  alone  ? Shall  we  give  up 
the  work  of  controlling  it  ? Shall  wo  say,  “ '^e  thing  is  so  tremendous  an  evil, 
is  so  far-reaching  and  so  deeply  pervading,  that  we"  cannot  do  anj-thing  with 
it  ’’  f Suppose,  when  the  ocean  threatened  to  submerge  Holland,  th*at  the  Hol- 
landers had  said,  “ We  are  little  men,  and  this  is  a grelit  ocean  ; one  surge  may 
carry  a thousand  of  us  away  like  so  many  egg-sheUs  ; we  cannot  do  anvihing.” 
But  they  did  not  say  that ; they  said  something  different : “ The  ocean  shall  not 
overflow  our  ficlds,'shall  not  destroy  our  harvests,  shall  not  drown  our  citi'^s  ; 
and  they  hacked  up  their  sturdy  words  with  sturdier  deeds.  They  built  dyke^ 
which  were  the  admiration  of  the  world.  They  kept  out  the  ocean,  saved  theii 
fields,  harvests,  cities,  and  populations,  and  the  surf  which  would  have  de- 
vastated them  is  now  walled  out  for  ever,  and.  asitstiykes  ceaselessly  their  bul- 
warks on  the  outside,  can  only  utter  in  a hoarse  voice  its  perpetual  amen  to 
the  grand  triumph  of  those  resolute  Hollanders.  I say,  if  intemperanoa 
threatens  our  country  as  the  oeeau  threatened  Holland,  let  us  act  as  t'ne  Hol- 
landers did.  God  helps  courageous  souls.  If  we  are  bold,  brave,  and  faithful, 
we  shall  yet  build  dykes  that  ^all  yet  save  our  country  and  oar  r.ace. 

Now,  th^re  are  two  things  that  we  can  do,  and  t’ae'first  is  to  check  this  evil 
at  its  beginning.  You  may  cut  down  twigs  and  branches,  you  may  lap  off  and 
trim  as  much  as  you  Mire,  but  the  tree  will  grow  faster  than  you' can’  cut.  It 
will  continue  its  "tremendous  persistency  of  growth  ; its  horrible  vitaUty  rising 
with  it,  it  win  grow  so  fast  you  cannot  check  it : for  .ts  long,  stoat  roots  run 
down  and  spread  far  and  wide  in  a very  fertile  sofi,  and  that  soil  is  the  con- 
vivial, social  usages  of  the  community.  It  is  that  which  has  been  al- 
luded to  here  this  evening.  Moderate  drinldng  is  the  soO  in  which  those 
roots  of  intemperance  run,  and  from  which  it  derives  its  moisture  and  its  lif«, 


C01ISTITaTI0NA.IiITY  AND  DUTY  OP  PROHIBITION. 


8 


There  Is  the  'wine-cup  on  the  hible  of  the  master’s  house  pressed  upon  hla 
guest ; the  mistress  of  the  house,  with  a tempting  smUe,  passes  it.  It  is  at  the 
public  dinner ; it  is  on  the  sideboard  on  New  Year’s  day  ; it  is  in  the  baU-room  ; 
wherever  there  is  relaxation,  this  custom  of  society  asserts  itself  ; poetry,  song, 

Tniicir*  ot>H  rmrYiHarlocc  focpinnf.iri’nci  Am-na «c  if  fl.nrl  if  tiitiq  its  rnA+ft  intA  thrt 


you  have  got  to  stop  those  lakes  before  you  can  stop  the  cataract.  The  lakes 
out  of  which  the  Niagara  of  intemperance  flows  in  its  destructive  course,  car- 

S thousands  of  precious  men  and  women  every  year,  are  the  moderate- 
ing  habits  of  society.  We  have  got  to  stop  it  there  ; and  therefore  we 
should  make  it  our  aim  especially  to  educate  the  young  men  and  women  of  the 
country  to  total  abstinence.  That  is  moral  eSort. 

Secondly,  we  should  put  forth  legal  efforts  to  suppress  the  trafSc.  Look  at 
the  saloons  in  this  city.  I have  often  crossed  streets  in  this  city,  and  encoun- 
tered three  tippling-saloons  on  the  four  comers,  and  I dare  say  there  are 
places  where  all  four  corners  are  saloons.  I have  often  encountered  several  in 
a block,  all  through,  every  kind,  from  the  lowest  slum  where  the  meanest 
drunkard  crawls,  to  the  flaunting  rum-palace  where  weU-dressed  gentlemen  go 
with  jaunty  air.  These  saloons  promote  drinking,  and  the  more  they  increase, 
the  more  they  gain  ; and  when  the  gaily-dressed  emissaries  of  the  brothel  lure 
their  victims,  they  make  use  of  social,  free  facilities  for  drinking.  Men  get 
away  from  their  homes,  and  sustain  each  other  in  their  carousals  in  these  dens 
of  iniquity.  It  is  in  the  saloon  where  the  pistol  is  often  heard,  where  the  dag- 
ger is  often  struck  home  ; it  is  the  place  where  vagabonds  frequent,  where  tramps 
grow  ; it  is  the  place  where  burglars  are  educated,  and  murderers  are  bred. 
They  are  fountains  of  defilement,  death,  and  damnation.  If  the  scenes  that  are 
enacted  in  the  rum-shops  of  the  United  States  could  be  set  before  us  just  as 
they  transpire — all  the  scenes  that  take  place  in  a single  year — and  we  were  told 
to  look  upon  the  horrible.speetacle,  it  would  be  fairly  like  gazing  into  the  abyss  of 
hell  itself.  Now,  over  all  this  iniquity  and  ruin  the  state  spreads  its  broad 
shield  ; it  licenses  it  aU  ; it  legalizes  it.  The  rumseller  brings  his  license,  and 
says,  “ Look  there,  I am  an  honest  man  ; I act  under  the  sanction  of  the  state  ; 
my  calling  is  a respectable  one,  because  it  is  legal ; I am  just  as  good  as  you 
are;  I act  under  the  patronage  and  protection  of  the  Government.”  Now,  let, 
us  who  are  citizens  : we  who  are  the  sovereign  people,  we  who  have  a right  to 
make  our  own  laws  through  our  representatives,  we  who  have  the  inalienable 
right  of  self-government  : let  aU  who  love  their  country  and  their  feUow-men, 
and  all  who  wish  to  arrest  vice,  aU  who  wish  to  advance  virtue — let  aU  of  us 
unite  in  demanding  that  there  shall  be  no  more  licensing  of  tippling-houses,  and 
that  there  shall  be  universal  suppression.  Let  this  in  future  be  our  battle-cry  : 
“No  more  license,  but  suppression.”  Now,  then,  the  question  that  is  immedi- 
ately asked  when  men  broach  this  subject  is  this:  “Is  prohibition  constitu- 
tional f Is  it  not  an  invasion  of  personal  rights  and  liberties  ?”  Robert  C.  Pit- 
man, judge  of  the  Superior  Court  in  Massachusetts,  has  settled  that  point  in  a 
single  sentence.  It  is  a marvellous  sentence.  Y ou  will  ha  re  to  look  sharply  into  it, 
for  it  is  compacted  together  with  amazing  terseness  : “ Every  license  rests  upon 
the  logical  basis  of  antecedent  general  prohibition,  and  derives  its  only  pecu- 
niary value  therefrom.”  That  sentence  deserves  unfolding.  The  idea  is  this  : 
that  the  granting  of  license  implies  the  previous  universal  prohibition  ; for  if 
there  were  not  antecedent  prohibition,  then  no  license  would  be  necessary  to 
sen  ; then  any  man  might  sell  and  any  man  might  not  sell.  A license  is  needed. 
Why  ? Because  prohibition  antecedent  is  in  fnil  force  before  any  license  is 
granted,  and  is  in  force  without  the  enactment  of  any  specific  law.  So  that  it 
appears  that  prohibition  is  originally  natural  and  univers.al ; prohibition  is  nor- 
mal, and  Ucense  is  abnormal ; license  is  the  exception.  The  dam  prohibition 
is  naturally  built  in  the  heart  of  the  community,  and  license  is  making  the 
breaches  in  it,  saying  to  one  man  : “ If  you  will  pay  me  so  many  dollars,  I will 
let  you  make  a hole  to  let  the  flood  of  d'amnatiou  through  it.”  So  Government 
makes  holes  alter  holes  in  the  dam  of  prohibition.  Hence,  when  we  ask  for  a 
prohibitory  law,  we  ask  for  that  which  is  right,  which  cannot  by  any  possibility 
be  wrong.  It  is  only  a le,gal  affirmation  of  that  which  naturally  and  justly  ex- 
ists, and  therefore  proliibition  is  the  very  e.ssence  of  rectitude.  A prohibitory 
law  is  just  as  right  as  it  possibly  can  be.  It  would  appear  from  this  that  the 
people  are  competent,  through  the  legislature,  which  is  only  their  organ  and  in- 
struments to  enact  a prohibitory  law.  _ 

There  is  just  one  other  question  I will  speak  about.  That  is  this  ; Is  it  con- 
stitutional to  do  it  ? The  people  say,  after  all,  ought  Government  to  do  it  f 
Let  us  revert  to  the  charter  of  our  liberties,  the  very  ideal  we  have  of  the  duties 
and  the  functions  of  government — the  Constitution  of  the  United  States  : “We, 
the  people  of  the  United  States,  in  order  to  form  a more  perfect  union,  estab- 
lish justice,  ensure  domestic  tranquillity,  provide  for  the  common  defence,  pro- 
mote the  general  welfare,  and  secure  the  islessings  of  liberty  to  ourselves  and 
our  posterity,  do  ordain  and  establish  this  Constitution  tor  the  United  States  of 
Arnica.”  Here  are  half  a dozen  points  that  furnish  good  ground  for  a pro- 


4 


OONSTITUTIONALITT  AND  DUTY  OF  YEOHIBITIOK. 


hlbltory  law.  I only  allude  to  one : “We,  the  people  of  the  United  States,  ta 
order  to  , , , establish  jwtice^^o  Qtoy  1 aver  that  granting  licenaei 

Is  not  establishing  justice,  but  directly  the  contrary.  It  is  not  just  to  allow  a 
set  of  men  like  liquor-sellers  to  tempt  other  men  as  they  do.  It  is  not  just  to 
authorize  those  men  to  ply  their  catalogue  of  arts  upon  the  drunkard,  who 
is  a man  incapable  of  defence.  It  is  net  just  for  these  men  to  exercise  an 
unfair  advantage  over  the  property  which  they  do  possess,  inasmuch  as  they 
take  the  toil  and  earning  of  the  laborer  who  is  their  victim,  and  get  what  he 
has  laid  up  in  the  savmgs-bank.  It  is  not  just  to  allow  tnese  men  to  inflict 
the  ineffable  sufferings  which  they  bring  down  upon  the  heads  of  innocent  wo- 
men. It  is  not  just  to  let  these  men  prosecute  a trade  to  contaminate  our 
children,  who  are  to  be  the  support  of  the  state. 

The  government  of  Sparta  went  as  far  as  to  take  the  children  out  of  the 
households,  and  bring  them  under  strict,  rigorous  government,  and  educated 
them  to  be  abstemious,  patriotic,  and  brave.  The  reason  why  Sparta  had  in- 
creased for  flve  hundred  years  was  because  she  had  such  laws  and  thoroughly 
enforced  them.  But  the  government  that  makes  license  lawful  succeeds  in 
ftfllictiug  our  children  with  hereditary  diseases  and  weakening  them  ; succeeds 
in  depraving  homes,  out  of  which  they  shall  not  emerge  good  citizens,  but  vaga- 
bonds. The  greater  part  of  juvenile  crime  among  us  is  the  product  of  our 
license  laws.  It  is  not  just  to  inaugurate  a license  system  which  necessarily 
Imposes  great  taxation  upon  the  virtuous  part  of  the  community — which ‘is  ob- 
liged to  pay  a great  deal  of  the  expense  incurred  solely  by  the  sme  of  intoxicat- 
ing liquors — thui  upholding  bad  men,  and  making  good  men  pay  for  it ; and  it 
is  not  just  to  the  criminals  that  are  made  such  by  rumseUing  to  condemn  them, 
and  at  the  same  moment  set  the  rumseller  where  he  can  say,  “ I have  done  it, 
and  will  do  it  again.”  I say  Licenses  are  not  just. 

The  prohibitory  law  has  been  tried  in  Maine.  It  has  been  eluded  ? Willyon 
teU  me  where  any  law,  in  any  State  and  any  kingdom  under  the  sky  of  God, 
that  has  been  enacted  has  not  been  eluded  ? There  are  laws  against  gambling 
and  houses  of  ill-fame,  against  the  printing  and  circulation  of  obscene  litera- 
ture. Are  there  no  obscene  papers  and  books  printed  ? There  is  a tariff  under 
the  Government.  Is  there  no  smuggling  done  in  the  land  ? If  the  argument  is 
correct  that  the  prohibitorv  law  against  selling  intoxicating  drinks  is  useless 
because  it  will  be  eluded,  there  ought  to  be  no  laws  against  gambling,  obscene 
literature,  and  there  ought  to  be  no  law  at  all,  because  somebody  will  break  it. 
Following  out’ this  argument  would  kill  all  law,  government,  and  society,  and 
introduce  universal  anarchj’  and  ruin.  When  good  laws  are  enacted,  and  when 
the  purpose  of  their  enactment  is  to  tell  people  what  right  and  wrong  is,  govern- 
ment, in  enacting  such  laws,  fultUs  the  part  of  that  education  which  it  is  under 
obligation  to  infuse  into  its  citizens.  If  the  law  against  gambling  cannot  be 
enforced,  what  then  ? It  stigmatizes  the  crime  of  gambling,  and  that  is  a high 
moral  end  gained  ; and  if  a prohibitory  law  is  passed  in  this  State  of  New  York, 
ond  men  do  elude  it,  if  it  is  not  thoroughly  enforced,  notwithstanding  it  pro- 
nounces the  criminality  of  the  act,  and  men  when  they  are  driven  to  sell  drink 
do  it  secretly  and  clandestinely,  and  feel  they  are  stigmatized,  a high  moral 
end  is  obtained.  But  the  Hon.  Woodbury  Davis  of  Maine  has  uttered  this  sen- 
tence : “ The  Maine  law  has  produced  one  hundred  times  more  visible  improve- 
ment in  the  character,  condition,  and  prosperity  of  our  people  than  any  other 
law  that  was  ever  enacted,”  That  is  good  testimony. 

I say,  therefore,  in  closing,  that  it  is  the  duty  of  all  good  citizens  to  agitata 
from  pulpit  and  platform  and  press  until  we  get  a prohibitory  law  in  the  State 
■ of  New  York,  and  in  all  the  States  of  the  Union.  That  is  the  duty  of  all  good 
citizens.  See  what  they  have  acquired  already.  In  fact,  the  greatest  antagon- 
ism to  the  temperance  cause  in  this  country  to-day  is  the  political  power  that 
rum  has  acquired.  Where  are  our  primaries  held  ? Over  rum-shops.  ^Yhat  is 
the  influence  most  potent  in  political  caucuses  ? Bum.  On  what  do  wiiy  poli- 
ticians and  manipulators  of  elections  most  confidently  rely  ? On  rum.  Y>  hat 
influence  sways  most  votes  ? Rum.  Who  rule  New  York  i Rumsellers.  ho 
are  the  chief  lords  of  many  of  the  cities  of  our  Union  } Rumsellers.  They  are 
subtle,  they  are  united,  they  understand  themselves,  they  have  a definite  aim, 
they  move  together,  and  their  object  is  to  control  the  pubiic^treasury.  They 
consider  rum  the  magic  key  that  will  enter  all  its  locks  \ and  if  things  go  as 
they  have  gone  for  the  few  years  past  in  this  country,  we  shrfll,  before  long,  be 
governed,  through  our  State  legislatures  and  our  Federal  Congress,  by  rum- 
sellers.  They  are  fast  advancing  to  national  supremacy.  I say  good  men 
weakly  withdraw  from  politics,  and  leave  the  thing  in  the  hands  of  these  bad 
men  ; and  if  our  temperate,  virtuous,  incorrupt  citizens  do  not  arise  in  their 
might,  and  make  a clean  sweep  of  these  men,  this  Republic  will  cease  to  exist, 
ftnn  we  shall  be  ruled  by  an  oligarchy  of  rumsellers. 

PuHGISHED  BY  THE  NATIONAL  TEMPERANCE  SOCIETY  AND  PUB* 

liiCATioN  House,  No.  58  Reade  Street,  New 
York,  at  $3  per  Thousand. 


No  136. 


Governor  of  Massachusetts  against 
License. 


OVEEIfOR  TALBOT  of  Massacliusetts  sent  the 
following  message  to  the  Legislature  vetoing 
the  liquor  license  bill  : 

COMMONWEALXn  OF  MASSACHUSETTS,  ) 
Executive  Department,  > 
Boston,  Jaue  27, 1S74.  j 

To  the  House  of  Representatives  : 

Gentlemen  : IVo  more  important  question  can  be  presented  to  us  Ie 
the  discharge  of  our  otEcial  duties  than  that  concerning  the  traffic  in 
intoxicating  liquors.  The  results  involved  in  any  decision  that  may  be 
made  are  so  momentous,  and  the  consequences  so  grave  and  wide-reach- 
ing, that  in  discussing  the  issue  we  ought  to  lay  aside  personal  and  party 
considerations  of  every  kind,  and  be  influenced  solely  by  the  obligations 
we  owe  to  our  fellow-men,  and  the  solemn  trusts  we  have  taken  upon 
ourselves  in  behalf  of  the  commonwealth.  Called  upon  to  consider  the 
bill  “ regulating  the  sale  of  spirituous  liquor,”  I must  act  on  my  oath 
and  my  conscience,  appealing  for  my  justification,  not  alone  to  the  en- 
lightened judgment  of  the  people  of  Massachusetts,  but  to  that  Power 
which  is  superior  to  all  common  authority,  and  infallibly  tries  the  heart 
of  men. 

If  we  admit  that  there  maybe  a use  of  intoxicating  liquors  so  guarded 
and  temperate  that  no  appreciable  evil  arises  therefrom,  it  is  still  the 
unanimous  verdict  of  the  civilized  would,  supported  by  a weight  of  evi- 
dence not  to  be  overthrown,  that  the  use  ol'  alcoholic  fluids  is  the  causf 
of  much  the  largest  proportion  of  the  crime  and  degradation  and  misery 
foiling  to  tie  lot  of  man.  Among  good  citizens  there  is  no  essentisd 
disagreement  on  the  point  that  the  traffic  in  such  fluids  must  be  re 
Strained  and  limited  as  far  as  possible.  Difference  of  opinion  arises  only 
when  we  consider  whether  it  is  best  to  try  to  regulate  the  sale  of  these 


8 GOVERNOR  OP  MASSACHUSETTS  AGAINST  LICENSE. 


fluids  or  prohibit  it  altogether.  If  we  adopt  the  latter  course,  we  are  at 
least  in  harmony  with  the  metheds  adopted  by  general  consent  toward 
other  offences  against  public  morals— offences  which  we  must  confess 
exist  to  a great  extent  among  ns  in  spite  of  our  efforts  to  prevent  then 
and  yet  upon  which  the  law,  so  far  as  its  precept  goes,  stamps  the  seal 
of  prohibition. 

The  history  of  the  struggle  with  the  evils  of  intemperance  is  most  in- 
structive. The  earliest  attempts  to  check  the  use  of  intoxicating  liqucrg 
were  in  the  direction  of  license  and  regulation.  These  attempts  con- 
tinued in  the  commonwealth  for  more  than  two  hundred  years,  with  a 
constantly-increasing  stringency  which  can  only  be  explained  on  the 
ground  that  mild  measures  were  found  to  be  insufficient,  until  in  1355 
the  experiment  was  detennined  upon  of  adopting  prohibition  as  the  only 
logical  anl  effective  method  of  dealing  with  the  matter.  'Without 
asserting  that  this  has  proved  so  successful  in  overcoming  the  evils  it 
was  meant  to  remedy  as  was  hoped  by  those  who  initiated  and  those 
who  sustain  the  prohibitory  policy,  I am  fully  of  the  opinion  that  more 
progress  has  been  made  toward  the  desired  end  than  was  ever  before 
made  in  the  same  period  under  any  other  system.  In  considering  what 
has  been  accomplished,  we  must  recognize  the  great  changes  that  have 
taken  place  since  this  system  was  inaugurated. 

Our  rural  districts  have  undergone  a gradual  depopulation,  and  large' 
numbers  of  our  young  men  have  become  massed  in  cities,  away  from  the 
restraints  of  home ; we  have  been  subjected  to  the  demoralizing  in- 
fluences inseparable  from  civil  war  long  continued,  and  the  necessity  or 
pressure  of  business  has  forced  us  into  a feverishness  or  restlessness  ol 
life  that  rapidly  wears  and  wastes.  Exactly  what  the  effect  upon  public 
morals  would  have  been  had  the  sale  of  intoxicating  liquors,  especially 
in  our  cities,  been  free  and  open  under  color  of  law  during  the  past 
sixteen  or  eighteen  years,  no  one  can  assume  with  positiveness  to  declare  ; 
but  I am  quite  confident  that  no  commonwealth  in  which  the  license 
®ystem  has  prevailed  can  point  to  nobler  records  of  achievements  in 
material  interests,  intellectual  pursuits,  or  moral  reforms,  and  equally 
certain  that  we  could  not  have  made  greater  progress  in  any  good 
uirecnon  under  a law  promotive  of  the  traffic  in  intoxicating  liquors. 

So  far  as  attempts  have  been  made  to  compromise  the  two  systems  cf 
prohibition  and  license  by  legalizing  sales  through  draggists  and  town 
agents,  or  by  permitting  the  unrestricted  sale  of  malt  liquors  and  light 
intoxicants,  the  results  have  been  unsatisfactory.  Abuses  of  the  grossest 
character  were  found  to  creep  in  at  once  where  any  privileges  were 
granted,  and  subsequent  legislatures  have  been  obliged  to  repeal  what 
seemed  to  be  on  the  passage  most  carefully  guarded  enactments  of  a re- 
Btrictive  character.  Compromise  in  this  regard  that  shall  not  be  abused 
in  the  most  flagrant  manner,  all  experiences  with  which  I am  familial 


GOVBBNOR  OF  MASSACHUSETTS  AGAINST  LICENSE.  If 


prove  to  be  an  impossibility.  If  intemperance  is  not  oar  inexohjole 
doom,  if  the  poverty  and  wretchedness  and  crime  brought  on  by  the  use 
of  intoxicating  liquors  are  not  our  inevitable  heritage,  what  can  we  do 
better  than  to  set  oui'selves  in  unyielding  opposition  to  the  traffic  which 
promotes  it? 

I am  aware  that  it  is  said  intemperance  increases  under  our  prohibitory 
law — that  the  sale  of  intoxicants  is  as  great  as  it  would  be  under  a 
license  law.  But  1 call  your  attention  to  the  absence  here  of  the  flaunt- 
ing and  attractive  bar-rooms  that  spread  their  snares  to  capture  the 
thoughtless  and  easily  tempted  in  cities  where  licenses  prevail ; to  the 
constantly  growing  sense  of  disfavor  with  which  the  liquor-traffic  is 
regarded  by  the  country  generally ; and  to  the  powerful,  systematic,  and 
unrelenting  activity  of  those  interested  in  it  to  break  down  the  law  and 
the  officers  who  try  to  enforce  it.  Here  is  an  evidence  that  the  statute 
does  impose  an  active  and  crippling  restraint,  from  which  relief  is  sought 
m the  elastic  and  easily  evaded  principle  of  license.  Even  if 
some  sincere  friends  of  temperance  prefer  a stringent  license  law  to  a 
prohibitory  system,  there  can  bo  no  denial  that  the  men  who  have  money 
and  business  at  stake  in  this  contest  are  the  most  ardent  and  urgent 
advocates  of  license,  and  I cannot  doubt  that  they  understand  them- 
selves and  calculate  shrewdly  the  advantage  they  will  gain. 

It  is  easy  to  mistake  the  clamor  of  interested  parties  for  the  voice  of 
the  people. 

"When  I seek  to  ascertain  what  the  latter  really  is,  I recall  that  the 
license  law,  elaborated  with  so  much  care  in  1833,  was  permitted  to 
remain  on  the  statute-books  only  till  the  people  could  next  be  heard  at 
the  ballot-box.  'With  the  single  exception  that  public  bars  are  prohibited, 
the  measure  now  under  consideration  is  in  no  essential  point  bettor,  and 
in  some  respects  I think  it  is  less  stringent  than  that  was.  The  notori- 
ous evasions  of  that  law,  and  the  open  way  in  which  all  intoxicants  were 
then  sold  under  the  protection  of  innholders’  and  victuallers’  licenses, 
demonstrated  the  powerlossness  of  such  enactments  to  protect  the 
community  against  the  evils  of  intemperance.  And  the  pending  bill 
seems  to  mo  simply  a prohibitory  measure  with  exceptions  that  totally 
destroy  its  moral  Ibrco  as  an  instrument  for  the  promotion  of  temperance 
and  the  well-being  of  our  people. 

It  is  objected  to  our  present  liquor  law  that  the  enforcement  of  it  is 
trregular  and  unequal.  Admitting  this  to  be  true  for  the  sake  of  argu* 
Blent,  what  assurances  have  we  that  a license  law  would  bo  more 
thoroughly  enforced?  Are  the  penalties  imposed  any  more  severe T 
Are  the  penalties  any  greater  incentives  to  officers  or  citizens  to  do  their 
duty?  The  prohibitory  legislation  of  1855  had  its  origin  in  the  deep- 
settled  conviction  that  the  license  law  of  that  period  was  viitually  a 
dead  letter.  The  law  of  1868  was  violated  with  such  open  and  reckless 


i GOTKRSOB  OF  MASSACHUSETTS  AGATJTST  LICEKBH. 

iraponity  that  it  became  a mockery  in  the  eyes  of  the  people.  In  oaf 
sister  States  where  the  license  system  now  prevails,  there  is  a daily  bur- 
den of  complaint  that  its  penalties  are  defied  and  its  provisions  evaded 
on  every  hand.  "Where  is  the  proof  that  the  local  police  and  magis- 
trates who  refrain  from  efforts  to  enforce  the  prohibitory  law  would 
faithfully  and  energetically  and  persistently  enforce  a license  law  ? II 
is  not  furnished  by  our  experience  or  by  the  experience  of  any  other 
commonwealth. 

hTor  is  the  argument  at  all  conclusive  to  my  mind  that  we  should  not 
retain  upon  our  statute-books  a law  that  is  in  advance  of  public  opinion 
on  this  subject.  Law  is  in  one  sense  a guide-board  pointing  out  the 
course  of  conduct  which,  if  followed,  will  secure  the  greatest  degree  of 
good  and  happiness  and  safety  for  all.  Therefore  it  must  often  be 
largely  ideal  in  its  character,  and  frequently  in  advance  <>f  the  general 
conduct  of  those  subject  to  it,  that  it  may  be  an  instructor  and  elevator, 
as  well  as  a source  of  restriction  and  punishment.  To  a law  commit 
ting  the  commonwealth  of  Massachusetts  to  a public  acknowledgment 
that  the  sale  of  intoxicating  liquors  as  a beverage  is  necessary  and  de- 
sirable, 1 cannot  on  my  conscience  give  assent.  It  seems  to  me  that 
the  only  safe  and  sound  position  for  a Christian  community  to  take  in 
regard  to  this  matter  is  that  of  absolute  and  unqualified  opposition  to 
the  traffic. 

"When  I think  of  the  victims  to  the  use  of  intoxicating  liquors  in  every 
village  of  the  commonwealth;  when  I study  the  great  field  over  which 
our  Board  of  State  Charities  has  supervision  ; when  I consider  our  alms- 
houses, and  hospitals,  and  homes  for  the  fallen  and  fnendle.ss ; when  I 
look  into  our  jails,  and  workhouses,  and  houses  of  correction,  and  tho 
State  prison ; and  when  I try  to  compute  the  losses  and  charges  upon 
all  our  industries  by  reason  of  imperfect  labor,  and  the  taxes  for  the 
support  of  these  institutions  for  reformation  and  punishment,  my  judg- 
ment unqualifiedly  condemns,  and  my  heail;  and  my  manhood  rebel 
agamst,  any  system  that  would  permit  the  great  source  of  all  wrong  and 
misery  and  crime  to  exist  by  authority  of  the  commonwealth.  My  con- 
victions against  the  policy  of  such  a system  are  too  solemn  and  resist- 
less for  me  to  hesitate  in  doing  the  duty  laid  upon  me.  I therefore 
return  the  bill  entitled  “ An  Act  regulating  the  Sale  of  Spirituous  or 
Intoxicating  Liquor”  to  the  House  of  Representatives,  in  which  it 
originated,  without  executive  sanction. 

THOMAS  TALBOT. 


Published  by  the  National  Temperance  Soceett  and  Publica* 
TioN  House,  No.  58  Reajoe  Street,  New  York, 

AT  $3  PER  Thousand. 


Nck  15L 


^ ' M. 


BY  REV.  R.  T.  CROSS. 


1 N 1870  there  were  in  the  United  States  one  hnn- 
dred  and  forty  thousand  licensed  liquor-saloons. 
U formed  into  a street  with  saloons  on  each  side,  allow- 
ing twenty  feet  to  each  saloon,  they  would  make  a street 
two  hundred  and  sixty-llve  miles  long.  Let  ns  imagine 
them  brought  together  into  such  a street,  and  let  ns  sup- 
pose that  the  moderate  drinkers  and  their  families  are 
marching  into  it  at  the  upper  end.  Go  with  me,  if  you 
Ijave  the  nerve  and  patience,  and  stand  at  the  lower  end, 
and  let  us  see  what  that  street  turns  out  in  one  year. 

Whatarmy  is  this  that  comes  marching  down  the  street 
in  solid  column,  five  abreast,  extending  five  hundred  ana 
seventy  miles  ? It  is  the  army  of  five  million  men  and  wo- 
men who  daily  and  constantly  go  to  the  saloons  for  intoxi- 
cating drinks  as  a beverage,  klarching  twenty  miles  a day, 
it  will  take  tliem  more  than  twenty-eight  days  to  go  by. 

How  they  are  gone,  and  close  in  their  rear  comes  an- 
other army,  marchiirg  five  abreast  and  sixty  miles  in  length. 
In  it  there  are 

530,000  CONFIRMED  DEUNKAEDS 

They  are  men  and  women  who  have  lost  control  of  their  ap- 
petites, who  are  in  the  regular  habit  of  getting  drunk  and 
making  beasts  of  themselves.  Marching  two  abreast,  the 
army  is  150  miles  long.  Sean  them  closely.  There  are 
gi’ay-haired  men  and  fair-haired  boys.  There  are,  alas ! 
many  women  in  that  army  sunk  to  deeper  depths  than  the 
men,  because  of  the  greater  heights  from  which  they  felL 
It  will  take  them  seven  days  to  go  by. 

It  is  a sad  and  sickening  sight,  but  do  not  tum  awaj 
yet ; for  hero  comes  another  army — one  hundred  thousand 
criminals.  From  jails  and  prisons  and  penitentiaries  they 
come.  At  the  head  of  the  army  comes  a long  line  of  per* 


2 


THE  STREET  OE  HELL  T 


sons  whose  hands  are  smeared  with  hnman  blood.  Wifh 
ropes  around  their  necks,  tlicv  are  on  the  way  to  the  gal- 
lows. Others  are  going  to  prison  for  life.  Every  crime 
known  to  our  laws  Las  been  committed  by  these  persons 
while  they  were  under  the  influence  of  drink. 

Eut  hark ! 'Whence  come  those  yells,  and  who  are  those, 
bound  with  strong  chains  and  guarded  by  strong  men, 
that  go  raging  by  ? They  are  raving  maniacs,  made  such 
by  drink.  Their  eyes  are  tonnentcd  with  awful  sights, 
and  their  ears  ring  with  liorrid  sounds.  Slimy  reptiles 
crawl  over  their  bodies,  and  fiends  from  hell  tonnent  them 
before  their  time.  They  arc  gone  now,  and  we  breathe 
more  freely. 

But  what  gloom  is  this  that  pervades  the  air,  and  what 
is  that  long  line  of  black  coming  slowly  down  the  street  ? 
It  is  the  line  of  funeral  processions.  One  hundred  thousand 
who  have  died  the  drunkard’s  death  are  beinsr  carried  to 
their  graves.  Drunkards  do  not  have  many  friends  to 
mourn  their  loss,  and  we  can  put  thirty  of  their  funeral 
processions  into  a mile.  We  thus  have 

A PROCESSION  3,333  3IILE3  LONG, 
ft  will  take  a good  share  of  the  year  for  them  to  go  by ; 
for  funeral  processions  move  slowely.  Yes,  most  of  them 
do ; but  every  now  and  then  an  uncofiined  corpse  in  a 
rough  cart  is  driven  rapidly  by,  and  we  Imar  the  brutal 
driver  eiug : 

’'Quick,  rattle  liis  bones,  rattle  bis  bones 
Over  the  stones : 

i^s’s  only  a pauper  wlioni  nobody  owns.’’ 

Look  into  the  coffins  as  they  goby.  See  the  dead  drunk 
aids.  Some  died  of  delirium  tremens,  and  the  lines  of  terroi 
5ie  still  plainlymarked  on  their  faces.  Some  frozen  to  death 
by  the  roadside,  too  drunk  to  reach  their  homes.  Some 
stumbled  from  the  wharf  and  were  drowned.  Some  wan- 
dered into  the  woods  and  died,  and  rotted  on  the  surface  of 
the  earth.  Some  blew  their  own  brains  out.  Some  were 
fearfully  stabbed  in  drunken  brawls.  Some  were  roasted  in 
burning  buildings.  Some  were  cnished  to  shapeless  massea 


THE  STREET  OP  HELL  I 


t 


oader  the  cai3.  They  died  in  various  ways,  but  strong 
drink  killed  thim  all,  and  on  their  tombstones,  if  they  have 
any,  may  be  fitly  inscribed  : “ He  died  a drunkard’s  death.” 

Close  behind  them  comes  another  long  line  of  funeral 
processions ; we  know  not  how  many,  but  they  are  more 
numerously  attended  by  mourning  friends.  They  contain 
tlie  remains  of  those  who  have  met  death  through  the  care- 
lessness and  the  cruelty  of  drunken  men.  Some  died  of 
broken  hearts.  Some  were  foully  murdered.  Some  were 
burned  to  death  in  buildings  set  on  fire  by  drunken  men. 
Some  were  horribly  mangled  on  the  railroad  because  of 
drunken  engineers  or  flagmen.  Some  were  blown  upon  a 
steamboat  because  a drunken  captain  ran  a race  with  a rival 
boat. 

But  here  comes  another  army — the  children,  innocent 
ones,  upon  whom  has  been  visited  the  iniquities  of  their 
fathers.  How  many  are  there  ? Two  hundred  thousand, 
Marching  two  abreast,  they  extend  up  the  street  thirty 
miles.  Each  one  must  boar  through  life  the  stigma  of  being 
the  drunkard’s  child.  They  are  reduced  to  poverty,  want, 
and  beggary.  They  live  in  ignorance  and  vice. 

Some  of  the  children  are  moaning  with  hungm",  and 
some  all  shivering  with  the  cold ; for  they  have  not  enough 
rags  to  keep  them  warm.  A large  number  of  them  aro 
idiots,  made  sucli  before  they  were  born,  by  brutal,  drunken 
fathers.  And,  ivorse  than  all  the  rest,  many  of  them  have 
inherited  a love  for  liquor,  and  are  growing  up  to  take  the 
places  and  do  the  deeds  of  their  fathers.  They  will  fill 
up  the  ranks  of  the  awful  army  of  drunkards  that  moves  in 
unbroken  columns  down  to  death. 

It  has  taken  nearly  a year  for  the  street  to  empty  itself 
of  its  year’s  work.  And  close  in  the  rear  comes  the  van- 
guard of  next  year’s  supply.  And  if  this  is  what  liquor 
does  in  our  land  in  one  year,  what  must  be  its  result  in  all 
the  world  through  the  long  centuries  ! 

Thus  far  we  have  listened  to  the  stories  that  the  figures 
tell.  But  they  cannot  tell  all.  They  give  only  the  outline 
of  the  terrible  tragedy  that  is  going  on  around  us.  They 
cannot  picture  to  us  the  wretched  squalor  of  a drank ard’i 


4 


THE  STREET  OF  HELL  I 


home.  They  cannot  tell  ns  how  many  unkind  and  cruel 
words  strong  di’ink  has  caused  otherwise  kind  and  tender- 
hearted husbands  and  fathers  to  utter  to  their  dear  ones. 
They  cannot  tell  us  how  many  heavy  blows  have  fallen  from 
the  drunkard’s  haml  upon  those  whom  it  is  his  duty  to  love 
and  cherish  and  protect.  They  cannot  tell  us  how  many 
fond  expectations  and  bright  hopes  which  the  fair  young 
bride  had  of  the  future  have  been  blasted  and  turned  to 
bitterest  gall.  They  cannot  number  the  long,  weary  hours 
of  night  during  which  she  has  anxiously  awaited,  and  yet 
fearfully  dreaded,  the  heavy  footfall  at  the  door. 

FIGURES  CANNOT  TELL 

US  how  many  scalding  tears  the  wives  of  drunkards  have 
shed,  or  boW  many  prayers  of  bitter  anguish  and  cries  of 
agony  God  lias  heard  them  utter.  They  cannot  tell  us  how 
many  mothers  have  worn  out  body  and  soul  in  providing  the 
necessities  of  life  for  children  whom  a drunken  father  has 
left  destitute.  They  cannot  tell  us  how  many  mothens’ 
hearts  have  broken  with  grief  as  tliey  saw  a darling  son  be- 
coming a drunkard.  They  cannot  tell  us  how  many  white 
hairs  have  gone  done  in  sorrow  to  the  grave,  mourning  over 
drunken  children.  They  cannot  tell  us  how  many  hard- 
fought  battles  the  drunkard,  in  his  sober  moments,  has 
fought  with  the  terrible  appetite ; how  many  times  he  has 
walked  his  room  m despair,  tempted  to  commit  suicide,  be- 
cause he  could  not  conquer  the  demon.  And,  finally,  we 
cannot  search  the  records  of  the  other  world,  and  tell  how 
many  souls  have  been  shut  out  from  that  holy  place, 
where  no  drunkard  enters,  and  banished  to  the  regions  of 
etern-al  despair  by  the  demon  of  drink. 

What  man,  what  woman,  what  child,  would  not  vote  to 
have  that  whole  street,  with  its  awful  traflBc  in  the  infernal 
stuff,  sunk  to  the  lowest  depths  of  perdition,  and  covered 
ten  thousand  fathoms  deep  under  the  curses  of  the  universe  ? 


Published  by  the  National  Tewper-ance  Society  and  Pub- 
lication House,  No.  58  Reade  Street,  New 
York,  at  $3  per  Thousand. 


No.  153, 


Second  Declaration  of  Independence. 

By  Rev.  A.  W.  Corey. 


Adopted  hy  The  National  Temperance  Society. 


BHEN  a long  train  of  usurpations  and  abuses,  pursuing 
invariably  the  same  object,  evinces  a design  to  re- 
duce mankind  under  an  absolute  despotism,  it  is 
their  right,  it  is  their  duty,  to  throw  otf  such  govern- 
ment, and  to  provide  new  guards  for  their  future 
security. 

There  is  an  enemy  among  us,  fellow-citizens,  the  history  of 
whose  reign  is  a history  of  repeated  injuries  and  usurpations, 
all  having  in  direct  object  the  establishment  of  an  absolute 
tyranny  over  mankind.  To  prove  this,  let  facts  be  submitted  to 
a candid  world. 

He  has  refused  to  submit  to  laws  the  most  wholesome  and 
necessary  for  the  public  good. 

He  has  kept  among  us  in  times  of  peace  staggering  armies, 
with  the  consent  of  our  legislatures. 

He  has  subjected  many  of  us  to  a jurisdiction  foreign  to  our 
constitutions  and  unacknowledged  by  the  law  of  nature  or  of 
God. 

He  has  deprived  our  citizens,  in  many  cases,  of  trial  by  sober 
juries. 

He  has  transported  many  of  our  citizens  beyond  the  bounds 
of  reason  into  the  seas  of  dissioation  and  ruin. 

He  has  imposed  taxes  on  us  for  the  support  of  pauperism  and 
crimes  of  his  own  engendering. 

He  has  established  and  sustained  depots  for  the  manufacture 
and  sale  of  the  most  destructive  instruments,  to  complete  the 
works  of  death,  desolation,  and  perfidy,  unparalleled  in  the 
most  barbarous  ages,  and  utterly  insufferable  among  a civilized 
people. 

He  has,  in  some  instances,  stimulated  our  citizens  to  fight 
against  their  dearest  friends  and  brethren,  and  become  the  exe- 
cutioners of  their  own  wives  and  children. 

He  has  occasioned  more  than  three-fourths  of  the  pauperism, 
three-fourths  of  the  crime,  and  more  than  one-half  of  the  in- 
sanity in  the  community,  and  thereby  filled  our  prisons,  our 
almshouses,  and  lunatic  asylums,  and  erected  the  gibbet  befoja 
our  eyes. 

He  has  influenced  our  elections  by  bribery  and  corruption. 


SECOND  DECLAKATION  OF  INDEPENDENCE. 


He  has  occasioned  insubordinatjon  and  desertion  in  our  army. 

He  has  deceived  and  plundered  the  defenceless  Indians  on 
our  western  borders,  and  destroyed  them  by  thousands  and  tens 
of  thousands,  and  at  times  stimulated  them  to  acts  of  the  most 
barbarous  cruelty  against  the  inhabitants  of  our  frontier  settle- 
ments. 

He  has  destroyed  multitudes  of  our  seafaring  men,  and  occa- 
sioned many  shipwrecks  every  year. 

He  has  occasioned  the  blowing-up  of  many  steamboats  on  our 
rivers,  and  the  consequent  destruction  of  much  property  and 
many  valuable  lives. 

He  has  destroyed  the  lives  of  tens  of  thousands  of  our  citizens 
annually  in  the  most  merciless  manner. 

He  has  turned  aside  hundreds  of  thousands  more  of  our  free 
and  independent  citizens  to  idleness  and  vice,  infused  into  tliem 
the  spirit  of  demons,  and  degraded  them  below  the  level  of 
brutes. 

He  has  made  thousands  of  widows  and  orphans,  and  destroyed 
she  fondest  hopes  and  blasted  the  brightest  prospeem. 

He  has  wasted  and  destroyed  the  properties  of  our  citizens  to 
the  amount  of  more  than  $600,0011,000  annually. 

Ho  has  imported  plague  and  pestUence  and  diffused  and  per- 
petuated its  influence  among  us. 

He  has  introduced  among  us  hereditary  diseases,  both  phy.si- 
cal  and  mental,  thereby  tending  to  deteriorate  the  human  race. 

He  has  converteil  many  of  our  pubhc  houses,  where  quietness, 
neatness,  and  good  order  should  be  found,  into  the  must  bois- 
terous and  filthy  dens  of  dissipation. 

He  encourages  men  to  spend  their  time  and  money  at  public- 
houses  while  their  families  are  starving  at  home. 

He  converts  annually  many  millions  of  bushels  of  grain,  the 
staff  of  life,  into  mortal  pois  n,  while  thousa  ds  of  om-  citizecs 
and  their  children  are  s'ofieriug  for  want  of  bread. 

He  has  misrepresented  the  character  of  our  people  and  the 
institutions  of  our  country  in  foreign  nations  and  in  the  isles  of 
the  sea. 

He  has  entered  our  courts  of  justice  and  our  legislative  halls 
and  disturbed  their  counsels,  and  even  the  sancmarios  of  our 
religion  and  the  ministers  at  the  altar  have  not  alt.igether  es- 
caped his  prevailing  and  blighti  'g  influence. 

Ho  has  encouraged  t^abbath- breaking,  profanity,  impurity, 
thieving,  house-burning,  robbery,  gamb’.mg,  slander,  and  fight- 
ing. and  has  ruined  the  m orals  of  every  community  over  which 
be  has  obtained  an  influence. 

He  vitiates  the  taste  and  demoralizes  tlie  habits  of  our  unsus- 
pecting children,  thus  preparing  them  for  an  easy  prey  here- 
after. 

He  has  brought  all  our  free  institutions,  the  perpetuity  of  oui 
Government,  and  our  civil  and  rehgious  liberty  itself  into  immi- 
nent danger. 

He  has  suborned  many  of  our  unsuspecting  citizens,  who  are 
opposed  to  his  infiutnee,  to  unite  with  and  sustaia 


SECOND  DECLARATION  OP  INDEPENDENCE. 


t 


irim,  and  spread  his  curses  far  and  wide  throughout  the  com- 
munity. 

While  in  the  very  act  of  ministering  to  his  victims  his  potions 
of  deadly  poison,  he  has  hypocritically  i)rofessed  to  offer  the 
most  grateful  beverage.  He  has  promised  health,  and  life,  and 
joy,  while  there  was  death  in  the  pot. 

He  has  seared  the  consciences  and  blunted  the  moral  percep- 
tions of  men,  so  as  to  destroy  the  efficacy  of  the  Gospel  and  th« 
means  which  God  has  appointed  for  thoir  spiritual  and  eternal 
good. 

He  has  dishonored  God,  in  whose  image  and  for  whose  gloiy 
man  was  created,  by  sinking  his  image  beneath  the  level  of  the 
irrational  brutes. 

He  has  arrayed  himself  against  all  patriotic,  humane,  and 
benevolent  efforts. 

He  expelleth  reason,  drowncth  memory,  defaceth  beauty, 
diminisheth  strength,  inflameth  the  blood,  causeth  internal, 
external,  and  incurable  wounds ; is  a witch  to  tlie  senses,  a 
devil  to  the  soul,  a thief  to  the  purse,  a beggar’s  companion,  the 
wife’s  woe,  the  children’s  sorrow,  the  picture  of  a beast,  the 
madman’s  prompter,  and  the  Pandora  to  tlie  human  family. 

We  wilt  now  call  the  world  to  witness  if  we  have  been  wanting 
in  attention  and  forbearance  to  the  traitor,  while  ho  has  been 
extending  his  unwarrantable  jurisdiction  over  us. 

Has  not  our  Government  afforded  him  the  most  liberal  pro- 
tection ? 

Has  he  not  sailed  under  our  fag  every  ocean  and  in  every  sea  ? 

Have  not  our  magistrates  given  him  the  freedom  of  our  cities, 
and  even  licensed  him  to  do  whatsoever  he  listed  1 

Has  he  not  been  ope  ly  received  and  lauded  in  our  public 
assemblies  H Have  not  our  lawyers  and  orators  and  statesmen, 
the  most  pi  omiuent  men  of  our  free  Republic,  been  obsequious 
to  his  call  and  subservient  to  his  interests  f Have  not  our 
physicians  administered  their  potions  under  his  ijfluence'?  and 
recommended  him  to  their  prilicnts  as  a gioom-dispeller  and 
health- restorer  1 Have  not  the  ministers  of  our  religion  and  the 
deacons  and  elders  of  our  churches  exercised  all  due  moderation 
towards  him  “i  Have  not  our  farmers  cheerfully  divided  with 
him  their  substance  ? Have  not  our  merchants  paifi  dear  for 
his  commodities,  which  have  proved  worse  than  useless  i Have 
notour  mechanics  given  him  a scat  on  their  work-benches? 
Have  not  our  old  men  bowed  dowm  before  him,  and  our  young 
men  done  him  reverence  t Have  not  our  maidens  smiled  upeu 
him  and  our  cluidren  been  taught  to  love  him?  Has  he  not 
been  received  into  our  domestic  circles,  and  to  a seat  at  our 
tables  even,  while  wives  arid  ch.ldreu  have  been  excluded  to  giva 
him  place?  Have  not  all  c'asses,  higii  and  low,  rich  and  poor, 
boud-and  free,  been  carried  away  by  bis  incantations,  and  stood 
up  for  bim  as  a good  creature  of  God  ? Aud  have  not  our  citi- 
aens  most  generously  sacriliced  for  him  their  fortunes,  their 
families,  their  innocence,  their  honor,  and  their  lives  ? 

- But  for  all  this  hospitality  and  kjndness,  what  have  they 


4 


BHCONTJ  DECLAEATION  OF  INDEPENDKNCE. 


receivea  from  the  ingrate  but  the  scorpion’s  sting  and  the  ser- 
pent's bite ! but  tvoes,  and  sorroivs,  and  contentions,  and  bab- 
blings, ai  d wounds  icithout  cause,  and  redness  of  eyes!  Evil, 
and  only  evil,  has  been  returned  for  good.  And  we  now  declare 
it  as  onr  belief  that  the  Liistory  of  the  human  race  affords  no 
parallel  examp. 3 of  slavery  and  degradation  inflicted  on  a will- 
ing and  unsuspecting  people ; that  no  tyrant  ever  subjected  so 
many  bu!nan  beings  to  such  unmitigated  grievances —to  such 
MIGHTY  woes.  Millions  of  victims  have  fallen  by  bis  oppressiois 
— millions  more  are  enthralled.  Tear  after  year  and  age  after 
age  have  passed  away,  but  the  cry  of  remonstrance,  though  often 
raised,  has  seldom  been  beard  or  heeded.  The  malignant 
tyrant,  steady  to  bis  purpose,  has  rioted  in  the  carnage,  and, 
with  infernal  exultation,  mocked  at  the  groans  of  the  dying 
and  sported  with  widows’  sighs  and  orphans’  tears.  Every 
domestic  and  soc’M  bond  has  been  disregarded.  The  peace  and 
respectability  of  families  have  been  destroyed.  Promising  and 
beloved  sous  hare  been  torn  from  their  i^arents,  husbands  from 
their  wives  and  families,  and  the  tender  mother  even  from  the 
helpless  and  dependent  offspring ; no  tie  in  nature  too  tender  to 
be  sundered,  no  chord  too  strong  to  be  broken,  by  this  unfeeling 
tyrant. 

And  we  now  ask  the  suffrages  of  the  whole  world  if  a domina- 
tion of  such  unrningled  oppression  and  tyranny  should  be  sub- 
mitted to  any  longer  by  an  enlightened,  a generous,  and  other- 
wise free  people  ? 

We  must,  therefore,  acquiesce  in  the  necessity  which  declares 
our  separation  from  Alcohol,  and  hold  him  hereafter  an 
implacable  enemy  in  war,  awd— no  friend  in  peace. 

We,  therefore,  the  representatives  of  the  views  of  all  true  tem- 
perance mCii  and  women  in  the  United  States  of  America  and 
throughout  the  world,  appeuling  to  the  Supreme  Judge  of  the 
earth  for  the  rectitude  of  our  intentions,  do,  in  the  name  and  by 
the  authority  of  all  true  temperance  men  and  women,  solemnly 
publish  and  declare  that  the  whole  human  race  ought  of  right  to 
bo  free  and  independent  of,  and  absolved  from  all  allegiance  to, 
Alcohol,  and  that  all  connection,  of  whatever  kind,  between  them 
and  him,  ought  to  be  totally  dissolved ; and  that  while  tliey  have 
no  right,  as  rational  and  accountable  beings,  to  contract  alli- 
ances, establish  commerce,  or  conclude  a peace  with  him, 
they  have  full  power  tc  wage  against  him  a war  of  ex- 
termination, and  to  do  all  ( ther  acts  and  things  which  may 
lawfully  be  do..©,  to  annihilate  his  dominion  from  under  the 
whole  heaven.  And  for  the  support  of  this  declaration,  with  a 
firm  reliance  on  the  protection  and  guidance  of  Divine  Provi- 
dence. wo,  temperance  men.  umtuaTy  pledge  to  each  other  our 
lives,  our  fortunes,  and  our  Sacred  Hoxoe, 


Fcblished  by  the  National  Temperance  Society  and  Pcb* 
ucATiON  House,  No.  58  Reade  Street,  New 
York,  at  |3  per  thousand, 


Constitutional  Amendment. 

Manufacture  and  Sale  of  I 'Jtoxicating  Liquors, 

Forty-Fourth  Congress. 


Speech  of  Hon.  Henry  W.  Blair,  of  New  Hampshire,  in 
the  House  of  Representatives,  Washington,  Wednesday 
Dec.  27,  1876, 

On  the  joint  resolution  introduced  by  him  proposing  an  amendment  to  the  Constitutioa 

of  the  United  States  in  regard  to  the  manufacture  and  sale  of  intoxicating  liquors. 

Mr.  BLAIR.  Mr.  Speaker,  I believe  that  the  public  good  requires 
the  protection  of  the  American  people  from  the  evils  of  alcohol  by  an 
amendment  of  the  Constitution. 

I will  read  the  joint  resolution  which  I have  prepared,  and  have  had 
the  honor  to  present  for  that  purpose  by  the  unanimous  consent  af 
the  House : 

Resolved  by  the  Senate  and  House  0/  Representatives  of  the  United  States  of  A merica 
in  Congress  assembled  {two-thirds  of  each  House  concurring  therein)^  That  the  fal- 
lowing amendment  to  the  Constitution  be,  and  hereby  is,  proposed  to  the  States,  to 
become  valid  when  ratified  by  the  Legislatures  of  three-fourths  of  the  several  States,  as 
provided  in  che  Constitution  : 

Article  — . 

S:£CnoN  I.  From  and  after  the  year  of  our  Lord  1900  the  manufacture  and  sale  of  dis 
tilled  alcoholic  intoxicatir^  liquors,  or  alcoholic  liquors  any  part  of  which  is  obtained  by 
distillation  or  process  equivalent  thereto,  or  any  intoxicating  liquors  mixed  or  adulterated 
with  ardent  spirits  or  with  any  poison  whatever,  except  for  medicinal,  mechanical,  chemi- 
cal, and  scientific  purposes,  and  for  use  in  the  arts,  anywhere  within  the  United  States 
and  the  Territories  thereof,  shall  cease  ; and  the  importation  of  such  liquors  from  foreign 
States  and  countries  to  the  United  States  and  Territories,  and  the  exportation  of  such 
liquors  from  and  the  transportation  thereof  within  and  through  any  part  of  this  country, 
except  for  the  use  and  purposes  aforesaid,  shall  be,  and  hereby  is,  forever  thereafter 
prohibited. 

Sec,  2.  Nothing  in  this  article  shall  be  construed  to  waive  or  abridge  any  existing 
power  of  Congress,  nor  the  right,  which  is  hereby  recognized,  of  the  people  of  any  State 
or  Territory  to  enact  laws  to  prevent  the  increase  and  for  the  suppression  or  regulation 
of  the  manufacture,  sale,  and  use  of  liquors,  and  the  ingredients  thereof,  any  part  of  which 
is  alcoholic,  intoxicating,  or  poisonons,  within  its  own  limits,  and  for  the  exclusion  of  such 
liquors  and  ingredients  therefrom  at  any  time,  as  well  before  as  after  the  close  of  the  year 
of  our  Lord  1900;  but  until  then,  and  until  ten  years  after  the  ratification  hereof,  as 
provided  in  the  next  section,  no  State  or  Territory  shall  interfere  with  the  transpoitatiou 
rf  said  liquors  or  ingredients,  in  packages  safely  secured,  over  the  usual  lines  of  traffic 
to  other  States  and  Territories  wherein  the  manufacture,  sale,  and  use  thereof  for  other 
purposes  and  use  than  those  excepted  in  the  first  section,  shall  be  lawful : Provided.^ 
That  the  true  destination  of  such  packages  be  plainly  marked  thereon. 

Sec.  3.  Should  this  article  not  be  ratified  by  three-fourths  of  the  States  on  or  before 
the  last  day  of  December,  1890,  then  the  first  section  hereof  shall  take  effect  and  be  ia 
force  at  the  expiration  of  ten  years  from  such  ratification  ; and  the  assent  ofa  ay  State  te 
•.his  vticle  shall  not  be  rescinded  nor  reversed. 

SflC.  4.  Congress  shall  enforce  this  article  by  all  needful  legislation. 


4 


Manufacture  and  Sale  of 


In  order  to  justify  legislation  of  any  kind  restricting  the  manufactur* 
and  use  of  alcoholic  liquors,  I believe  it  to  be  necessary  to  maintain 
these  propositions : 

First.  That  it  is  the  duty  of  society,  through  the  ageilfcy  of  govern- 
ment, which  is  the  creature  of  society,  to  enact  and  enforce  all  laws 
which,  while  protecting  the  individual  in  the  full  possession  and  enjoy- 
ment of  his  inalienable  rights,  tend  to  promote  the  general  welfare 
and  especially  whenever  that  welfare  is  impaired  or  threatened  by  any 
existing  or  impending  evil,  it  is  the  duty  of  society  to  enact  and  enforce 
laws  to  restrict  or  destroy  that  evil.  It  may  be  proper  to  observe  that 
no  law  can  promote  the  general  welfare  which  deprives  an  individual 
of  an  inalienable  right,  when  that  right  is  properly  defined,  or  which 
impairs  the  enjoyment  thereof,  whether  of  life,  liberty,  property,  or 
the  pursuit  of  happiness.  But  society  has  inalienable  rights  as  well  as 
individuals,  and  the  right  to  such  legislation  as  will  promote  the  gen- 
eral welfare,  in  its  true  sense,  is  one  of  them ; and  the  inalienable 
rights  of  individuals  and  the  inalienable  rights  of  society  at  large 
are  limited  by,  and  must  be  construed  and  enjoyed  with  reference  to, 
each  other. 

Second.  While  society  has  no  right  to  prevent  or  restrict  the  use  of 
an  article  by  individuals  for  purposes  which  are  beneficial  only,  yet 
if  that  use,  beneficial  to  some,  is  found  by  experience  to  be  naturally 
and  inevitably  greatly  injurious  in  its  effects  upon  others  and  upon 
society  in  general,  then  it  becomes  the  duty  of  society,  in  the  exercise 
of  its  inalienable  right  to  promote  the  general  welfare  and  in  self- 
defense  to  social  life,  just  as  the  individual  may  defend  his  natural 
life,  to  prohibit,  regulate,  or  restrict  the  use  of  that  article,  as  the  case 
may  require.  This  principle  is  daily  applied  in  laws  which  control  the 
manufacture  and  use  of  gunpowder,  nitro-glycerine,  dymamite,  and 
other  things  of  great  and  dangerous  potency,  the  unrestrained  use 
of  which,  even  for  useful  purposes,  has  been  shown  by  experience  to 
be  destructive  to  the  inalienable  rights  of  others.  This  results  from 
the  common  principle  of  law  that  every  man  must  so  enjoy  his  own 
rights  as  neither  to  destroy  or  impair  those  of  another,  and  it  is  the 
great  end  for  which  government  is  instituted  among  men  to  compel 
him  so  to  do. 

Third.  No  person  has  a right  to  do  that  to  himself  which,  impairs 
or  perverts  his  own  powers  ; and  when  he  does  so  by  means  of  that 
which  society  can  reach  and  remove  by  law,  to  such  extent  as  to  be- 
come a burden  or  a source  of  danger  to  others,  either  by  his  example 
or  by  his  liability  to  commit  acts  of  crime,  or  to  be  essentially  incapac- 
itated to  discharge  his  duties  to  himself,  his  family,  and  society,  the  law, 
that  is,  society,  should  protect  both  him  and  itself.  A man  has  no 
more  right  to  destroy  his  inalienable  rights  than  tjhose  of  another,  oi 
than  another  has  to  deprive  him  of  his  own.  The'  laws  restraining  the 
spendthrift  in  the  destruction  of  his  inalienable  right  in  property  and 
punishing  suicide  ^as  the  common  law  did,  by  forfeiture  of  estate,  etc.), 
or  aiieinpted  self-murder  (as  the  law  does  now),  are  familiar  exam.plea 
of  the  application  of  this  principle. 

These  are  elementary’  principles  of  law  and  of  common  sense.  They 
are  corner-stones  of  all  just  government.  To  these  principles  every 
member  of  society  is  held  to  have  given  his  assent.  They  are  unquo 


Intoxicating  Liquors.  5 

Honed,  so  far  as  I know,  by  any  one  who  bv,ilie\  es  in  any  law.  They 
ase  axiomatic  and  indestructible  as  the  social  organization  itself. 

Fourth.  The  use  (unless  medicinally)  of  alcoholic  liquors  to  the  ex- 
tent of  intoxication  or  poisoning — which,  as  will  hereafter  be  seen,  is 
the  same  thing  as  intoxication — is  an  injury  to  the  individual ; it  in- 
flicts great  evils  upon  society  at  large  ; it  is  destructive  to  the  general 
welfare ; it  is  of  a nature  which  may  be  greatly  restricted,  if  not  de- 
stroyed, by  the  enforcement  of  appropriate  laws  ; consequently  such 
laws  should  be  enacted  and  enforced  ; and  this  should  be  done  in  our 
country,  either  by  the  States,  or  by  the  General  Governmsnt,  or  by 
both,  if  such  laws  can  be  made  more  efficient  thereby. 

I believe  this  proposition  to  be  true,  and  respectfully  ask  candid 
attention  to  the  facts  and  observations  which  follow. 

DEFINITION  OF  TERMS,  ETC. 

The  substance  known  as  alcohol  is  thus  defined  by  Webster; 

Pure  or  highly  rectified  spirit,  extracted  by  simple  distillation  from  various  vegetahlft 
nices  and  infusion  of  a saccharine  nature,  which  have  undergone  vinous  fermentation* 
the  spirituous  or  intoxicating  element  of  fermented  liquors. 

Fermentation,  the  process  by  which  alcohol  is  first  obtained  from 
organic  substances,  but  combined  with  much  larger  quantity  of  other 
matter,  is  thus  defined  by  the  same  authority: 

That  change  of  organic  substances  by  which  their  starch,  sugar,  gluten,  etc.,  under  the 
Influence  of  water,  air,  and  warmth,  are  decomposed,  usually  with  evolution  of  gas  and 
heat,  and  their  elements  are  recombined  in  new  compounds.  Vinous  fermentation  con- 
verts sugar  into  alcohol. 

Brewing  is  the  preparation  of  alcoholic  liquor  from  malt  and  hops, 
and  from  other  materials,  by  steeping,  boiling,  and  fermentation. 

Distillation,  or  rcctijicatioti  (to  make  straight  or  pure),  is  a process 
subsequent  to  fermentation,  by  which  alcohol  in  a highly  refined  and 
most  powerful  form  is  obtained  from  fermented  or  brewed  liquors.  It 
is  thus  defined  by  the  eminent  lexicographer  before  cited  : 

The  act  of  falling  in  drops,  or  the  act  of  pouring  or  throwing  down  in  drops.  The 
volatilization  of  a liquid  in  a closed  vessel  by  heat,  and  its  subsequent  condensation  in  a 
separate  vessel  by  cold,  as  by  means  of  an  alembic,  or  still  and  refrigeratory,  or  of  a retort 
and  receiver  ; the  operation  of  extracting  spirit  from  a substance  by  evaporation  and  con- 
densation ; rectification. 

pisiiller:  One  whose  occupation  is  to  extract  spirit  by  distillation. 

Alcohol  for  commercial  purposes  is  obtained  by  distilling  wine  and  other  liquors  that 
nave  undergone  vinous  fermentation  ; carbonate  of  soda  is  sometimes  added  to  keep  back 
acetic  acid,  and  fusel-oil  is  removed  by  charcoal.  The  alcohol  of  the  London  pharmaco- 
poeia contains  about  82  per  cent,  of  alcohol  and  18  of  water.  Its  specific  gravity  is  required 
to  be  838,  water  being  1,000.  It  has  great  affinity  for  water,  absorbing  it  from  the  atmos- 
phere. 

Professor  Brande  found  from  1 to  2 per  cent,  of  alcohol  in  small-beer  ; 4 in  porter;  6 to 
9 in  ales  ; about  12  in  the  light  wines  of  France  and  Germany  ; from  19  to  25  m port  and 
sherr}’,  and  other  strong  wines  ; from  40  to  50  and  occasionally  more  in  brandy,  gin,  and 
whisky.  The  strength  of  these  liquors  is  ascertained  by  various  expedients  • but  the  pro- 
cess is  sometimes  complicated  by  reason  of  the  different  ingredients  intermixed  to  color, 
sweeten,  or  flavor  the  liquor,  or  fraudulently  added  to  alter  the  specific  gravity,  or  to  sub 
stitute  a cheaper  material. 

See  the  New  American  Cyclopjedia,  AlcohoL 

The  discovery  of  distillation  of  wine  has  been  attributed  to  Albucasis,  or  Casa,  an 
Arabian  chemist  and  physician  of  the  eleventh  century,  but  many  centuries  elapsed  before 
the  process  of  distillation  was  applied  to  produce  those  stronger  drinks  which,  under  the 
name  of  “spirits,”  are  now  in  such  common  use  in  daily  life.  Brandy  is  a late  term  in 
European  literature.  Gin  was  unknown  two  hundred  years  ago.  Rum  is  an  American 
term  applied  to  an  American  invention  ; and  whisky,  a Celtic  word — nisge — water — has 
n M been  anglicized  more  than  a century  and  a half.  Neither  rum,  brandy,  gin,  or  whisky 
have  been  in  common  use  as  spirituous  drink* , nor  any  alcoholic  drinks  of  anything  likf 
similar  destructive  power,  until  comparatively  recent  modern  times. 


6 


Manufacture  and  Sale  of 


See  fitst  lecture  in  “Course  of  six  Cantor  lectures  delivered  before 
the  Society  of  Arts,  on  alcohol,  by  Benjamin  W.  Richardson,  M.A.. 
M.D.,  F.R.S.”  Dr.  Richardson  is  known  as  one  of  the  ablest  scien- 
tific men  of  the  age,  and  these  lectures  are  the  most  recent  and  valu- 
able contributions  to  the  subject  of  “ alcohol  ” that  I have  been  able 
to  obtain. 

Distilled  alcoholic  liquors,  the  forms  now  in  common  use  embraced 
by  the  first  section  of  the  proposed  amendment,  comprise  brandy,  rum, 
gin,  and  whisky. 

Fermented  liquors  in  common  use  are  wine,  cider,  ale,  and  beer.  The 
latter  are  alcoholic,  but  a7-e  7iot  mixed  with  alcohol  obtamed  by  distil- 
lation, and  are  far  less  powerful  and  destructive  to  mankind.  These 
are  not  included  in  the  first  section,  but  are  left  to  the  action  of  locai 
laws,  as  is  now  the  case,  by  section  2 of  the  amendment  proposed. 

In  treating  the  subject,  1 wish  first  to  invite  attention  to  the  nature 
of  alcohol  and  its  effects  upon  the  human  system,  as  established  by 
chemical  and  medical  science.  I shall  then  cite  facts  and  statistics 
from  other  sources,  tending  to  show  the  necessity  of  legislation  upon 
the  subject.  Tlaen  I shall  explain  the  adaptation  of  the  proposed 
amendment  to  the  removal  of  the  alleged  evil,  and  endeavor  to  show 
that  the  powers  of  government  are  inherent  and  ample,  and  should  be 
exercised  in  the  premises. 

THE  TESTIMONY  OF  SCIENCE  AND  OF  THE  MEDIC.YL  PROFESSION. 

An  English  writer,  who  is  declared  by  Governor  Andrew  in  his  re- 
markable argument  in  favor  of  a license  law,  before  a committee  ol 
the  Massachusetts  Legislature,  April  4,  1867,  probably  the  ablest  and 
most  eloquent  presentation  of  the  views  of  those  opposed  to  prohib- 
itory laws  ever  made  in  the  world,  to  be  “ one  of  the  most  able  En- 
glish scientific  critics,”  etc.,  and  who  is  opposed  to  teetotalism,  says  in 
the  Cornhill  Magazine  of  September,  1862: 

And  first  as  to  the  effect  of  long  continued  habits  of  alcoholic  excess  upon  the  general 
health  of  the  body,  these  may  be  summed  up  in  brief  by  one  word — degeneration.  De- 
generation of  structure  and  chemical  composition  is  the  inevitable  fate  of  the  tissues  of 
the  drunkard.  Apart  from  moral  influences^  all  that  we  see  of  physical  misery’,  of  weak- 
ened intellect  of  shortened  life  in  the  habitual  drunkard,  is  due  to  this  degeneration  ol 
tissue,  which  is  gradually,  but  infallibly  brought  about  by  alcoholic  excess.  Even  the  very 
blood,  the  beginning  of  all  tissues,  is  affected  in  a similar  way,  as  we  might  expect. 

There  is  no  doubt  that  in  excessive  doses,  alcohol,  if  it  be  a food  at  all,  is  a very  bad  one, 
and  we  must  remember  that  the  drunkard  does  in  ‘act  test  its  capacity  to  act  as  food  ; foi 
by  his  habits  he  so  impairs  his  appetite  that  he  can  take  verj’  little,  if  anj',  ordinarj’  food. 

This  writer  represents  that  class  of  medical  gentlemen  whose  scien- 
tific views  are  most  friendly  to  alcohol,  and  he  states  his  conclusions 
thus : 

On  the  part  of  alcohol,  then,  I venture  to  claim  that,  though  we  all  acknowledge  it  to 
be  ^poiso7iy  i/  taken  during  health  in  any  but  quite  restricted  doses,  it  is  also  a most 
valuable  medicine  food. 

It  will  be  observed  that  I make  no  attack  upon  it  as  a meduine. 
This  is  the  most  favorable  statement  of  the  nature  of  alcohol  in  its 
effects  upon  the  human  organism  which  can  be  found,  based  upon  re- 
spectable medical  authority.  It  is  that  adduced  by  Governor  Andrew 
in  his  great  argument  against  prohibition,  and  I venture  to  s.'v  that 
there  is  not  a particle  of  dispute  in  the  medical  world  that  it  is  true 
BO  far  as  it  goes.  I am  not  aware  of  the  existence  of  any  mediciU 
tathority  which  admits  that  the  use  of  distilled  alcoholic  liquors,  as 


Intoxicating  Liquors. 


7 


a coinmcn  daily  drink,  does  not  inevitably  end  to  destroy  the  h.mau 
system.  True,  there  are  a few  exceptiona  instances  recorded  where 
men,  after  having  destroyed  the  normal  functions  of  their  organism,  so 
that  all  healthy  and  natural  foods  are  rejected  by  it,  have  lived  for  a time 
almost  wholly  upon  alcohol  itself.  But  in  all  cases  where  its  action 
is  favorable,  it  finds  a diseased  or  unnatural  condition  to  which  it  adapts 
itself,  like  the  surgeon’s  knife  to  the  tumor  or  to  the  shattered  limb, 
there  are  exceptional  organisms  which  prove  the  rule.  But  from  this 
circumstance  to  argue  that  it  is  beneficial  to  the  healthy  normal  state 
of  child  or  man,  is  like  feeding  a man  upon  the  drugs  of  the  apothe- 
cary, because,  as  medicines,  they  have  been  instrumental  in  restoring 
healthy  digestion  to  the  dyspeptic.  I cheerfully  grant  that  there  is 
a large  though  lessening  array  of  eminent  medical  authorities,  which, 
while  vigorously  condemning  the  use  of  distiiled  liquor,  as  a beverage, 
declares  its  belief  that  the  fermented  wines  and  other  mild  forms  of  alco- 
holic liquor  are,  on  the  whole,  beneficial  when  used  in  moderate 
quantities;  but  I am  not  dealing  with  these  at  all,  and  reiterate  the 
statement  that  the  medical  world  is  a unit  in  declaring  that  the  com- 
mon use  of  distilled  liquors  operates  as  a poison,  and  not  as  a food,  and 
destroys  the  mind  and  body  of  man. 

While  conceding  that  many  chemists  and  p^iysicians  are  advocates 
of  the  moderate  use  of  light  wines  and  fermented  drinks,  it  is  only 
fair,  however,  to  say  that  I think  that  the  weight  of  medical  opinion, 
based  upon  the  lates.  scientific  investigation  and  observation,  is 
against  the  position  that  alcohol,  even  in  fermented  forms,  ever  oper- 
ates otherwise  than  as  a poison.  But  this  is  not  important  to  the 
argument,  for  that  rests  upon  tlve  undisputed  verdict  of  the  medical 
world,  that  “ alcohol,  except  wheri  taken  in  quite  restricted  doses,  is 
poisonous  to  a person  in  health.” 

Dr.  Willard  Parker,  a very  eminent  name  among  the  physicians  of 
America,  writes  the  present  year : 

Alcohol  has  no  place  in  the  healthy  system,  but  is  an  irritant  poison,*’  producing  a 
diseased  condition  of  body  and  mind. 

The  International  Medical  Congress,  the  highest  medical  body  in 
ijhe  world,  held  its  last  session  at  Philadelphia,  in  September,  1876, 
and  I find  the  following  in  the  official  report  of  its  proceedings  on  the 
l6th  of  that  month  : 

The  following  is  the  report  from  the  section  on  medicine,  on  the  paper  of  Dr.  £.  M 
Hunt,  on  “ Alcohol  in  its  therapeutic  relations  as  a food  and  a medicine.” 

First.  Alcohol  is  not  shown  to  have  a definite  food  value  by  any  of  the  usual  methods 
of  chemical  analysis  or  physiological  investigation. 

Second.  Its  use  as  a medicine  is  chiefly  as  a cardiac  (relating  to  the  heart)  stimulant, 
and  eften  admits  of  substitution. 

Third.  As  a medicine  it  is  not  well  fitted  for  self-prescription  by  the  laity,  and  the  med« 
ical  profession  is  not  accountable  for  such  administration  or  for  the  enormous  evili 
resulting  therefrom. 

Fourth.  The  purity  of  alcoholic  liquors  is  in  general  not  as  well  assured  as  that  of  arti<* 
clcs  used  for  medicine  should  be.  The  various  mixtures  when  used  as  medicine  should 
have  definite  and  known  composition,  and  should  not  be  interchanged  promiscuously. .. 

Please  note  that  this  supreme  authority  says  that  alcohol  is  not 
known  to  have  food  value,  and  that  its  principal  use  as  a medicine  is 
to  stimulate  the  heart,  not  to  create  power  by  nutrition,  but  to  use  up 
the  capital  of  the  body  with  unnatural  rapidity,  and  even  for  this  pur- 
pose SOI  nething  else  might  generally  be  substituted. 

I have  already  cited  the  Cantor  lectures  by  Dr.  Richardsom  pub* 


8 


Manufacture  and  Sale  of 


lished  this  year,  by  far  the  most  profound  publication  upon  this  subject 
which  I have  seen.  Upon  page  86  he  gives  the  details  of  careful 
observation  and  experiment,  and  says : 

Adopting  the  lowest  estimate  which  has  been  given  of  the  daily  work  of  the  heart, 
tamely,  as  equal  to  one  hundred  and  twenty-two  tons  lifted  one  foot,  the  heart  during 
the  alcoholic  period  did  daily  work  in  excess  equal  to  lifting  fifteen  anc  eight-tenths 
tons  one  foot,  and  in  the  last  two  days  did  extra  work  to  the  amount  of  tv.'enty-loui 
tons  lifted  as  far.  * * * It  will  seem  at  first  sight  almost  incredible  that  such  an 

excess  of  work  could  be  put  upon  the  heart,  but  it  is  perfectly  credible  when  all  the  facts 
are  known.  The  heart  of  an  adult  man  makes,  as  we  see  above,  seventy-three  and  fifty- 
seven-tenths  strokes  per  minute.  This  number  multiplied  by  sixt}”  for  the  hour,  and 
again  by  twenty-four  for  the  day,  would  give  nearly  106,000  as  the  number  of  strokes  per 
day.  * * * And  speaking  generally,  we  may  put  the  average  at  100,000  in  the  entire 
day.  With  each  of  these  strokes  the  two  ventricles  of  the  heart,  as  they  contract,  lift  up 
into  their  respective  vessels  three  ounces  of  blood  each,  that  is  to  say.  six  ounces  w’ith  the 
combined  stroke,  or  600,000  in  the  twenty-four  hours.  The  equivalent  of  work  rendered 
by  this  simple  calculation  would  be  one  hundred  and  sixteen  foot-tons,  and  if  w'e  estimate 
the  increase  of  work  induced  by  alcohol  we  shall  find  that  four  ounces  of  spirit  (daily) 
increase  it  one-eighth  part,  six  ounces  one-sixth  part,  and  eight  ounces  one-fourth  part. 

Upon  the  “food”  question  he  says,  page  too : 

Alcohol  contains  no  nitrogen  ; it  has  none  of  the  qualities  of  these  structure-building 
foods  ; it  is  incapable  of  being  transformed  into  an)’  of  them  ; it  is  therefore  not  a food  in 
the  sense  of  its  being  a constructive  agent  in  the  building  up  of  the  body.  In  this  respect 
I believe  there  is  now  no  difference  of  opinion  among  those  who  have  most  care^Uy 
observed  the  action  of  alcohol. 

Further  on  he  disproves  the  common  notion  that  alcohol  develops 
an  mcrease  of  ani7}ial  heat.  In  the  first  stage  of  its  operation  it 
drives  the  blood  to  the  surface  by  temporary  stimulation  of  the  heart, 
creating  a flush,  while  the  internal  heat  is  being  actually  diminished, 
and  demonstrates  that  though  in  the  “ first  and  third  stages  of  alco- 
holic disturbance  there  is  often  muscular  excitement  which  passes  for 
increased  muscular  power,  the  muscles  being  rapidly  stimulated  into 
motion  by  the  nerv'ous  tumult,  yet  the  muscular  power  is  actually 
enfeebled.” 

Discussing  the  adulteration  of  alcoholic  liquors,  he  says,  page  124: 

A hona  fide  wine,  derived  from  the  fermentation  of  grapes  purely,  can  not  contain  more 
than  17  per  cent,  of  alcohol ; yet  our  staple  wines  by  an  artificial  process  of  fortifying  and 
brandying,  which  means  the  adding  of  spirit,  are  brought  up  in  sherries  to  20  ana  in  ports 
to  even  25  per  cent. 

But  the  most  startling  fact  of  all,  given  in  this  connection,  is  this  : 

The  admitted  addition  of  some  actively  poisonous  substances  to  alcohol,  in  order  to 
produce  a new  luxury,  is  the  evil  most  disastrous.  The  drink  sold  under  the  name  of 
absinthe  is  peculiarly  formidable.  In  this  liquor  five  drachms  of  the  essence  of  absinthe, 
or  wormwood,  are  added  to  one  hundred  parts  of  alcohol,  * ♦ * which  has  been 
discovered  to  exert  the  most  powerful  and  dangerous  action  upon  the  ne^^'Ous  functions. 
Indeed  such  are  the  terrible  consequences  incident  to  this  agent,  that  I a^ee  with  Dr. 
Decoisne  in  maintaining  that  it  ought  by  legal  provisions  to  be  forbidden  as  an  article 
of  human  consumption  in  all  civilized  communities.  Until  recently  absinthe  has  not 
been  publicly  offered  for  sale  in  this  country  on  a large  scale.  But  now,  unhappily, 
the  poison  is  openly  announced  even  here,  and  the  consumption  is  on  the  increase 
(Pages  125,  126.) 

After  demonstrating  the  effects  of  alcohol  in  producing  structural 
disorganization  of  the  body,  inflicting  fatal  disease  of  every'  important 
organ  of  the  body  and  the  overthrow  of  the  mental  powers,  Professor 
Richardson  proceeds  thus  ; and  I call  attention  to  it  as  bearing  upon 
this  proposed  amendment,  which  has  special  care  for  generations 
to  come : 

The  most  solemn  fact  of  all  bearing  upon  these  mental  aberrations  produced  D) 
alcohol,  and  upon  the  physical  not  less  than  the  mental,  is  that  the  mischief  inflicted  oa 
man  by  his  own  act  and  deed  can  not  fail  to  be  transferred  to  those  who  descend  from  hia 
and  who  are  thus  irresponsibly  afflicted.  Among  the  many  inscrutable  designs  of  natu* 
none  is  more  manifest  than  this : that  physical  vice,  like  physical  feature  and  physia  * 


hitoxicating  Liquors 


9 


r»ftae,  descends  in  line.  It  is,  I say,  a solemn  reflection  for  every  man  and  every  woman* 
that  whatever  we  do  to  ourselves  so  as  to  modify  our  own  physical  conformation  ana 
mental  type,  for  good  or  for  evil,  is  transmitted  to  generations  that  have  yet  to  be.  Not 
one  of  the  transmitted  wrongs,  physical  or  mental,  is  more  certainly  passed  on  to  those 
yet  unborn  than  the  wrongs  which  are  inflicted  by  alcohol.  We,  therefore,  who  live  to 
reform  the  present  age,  in  this  respect  are  stretching  forth  our  powers  to  the  r ext,  to 
purify  it,  to  beautify  it,  and  to  lead  it  toward  that  millennial  happiness  and  blessedness 
which  in  the  fullness  of  time  shall  visit  even  the  earth,  making  it,  under  an  increasing 
ight  of  knowledge,  a garden  of  human  delight,  a paradise  regained. 

I trust  such  an  object  will  not  be  deemed  unworthy  of  the  profound 
attention  of  the  Congress  and  people  of  the  United  States.  He 
closes  thus : ^ — 

This  chemical  substance,  alcohol,  an  artificial  product,  devised  by  man  for  his  purposes 
and  in  many  things  that  lie  outside  his  organism  a useful  substance,  is  neither  a food  nor 
a drink  suitaole  for  his  natural  demands.  Its  application  as  an  agent  that  shall  enter  the 
living  organization  is  properly  limited  by  the  learning  and  skill  possessed  by  the  physi- 
cian— a learning  that  itself  admits  of  being  recast  and  revised  in  many  important  details, 
and  perhaps  in  principles.  If  this  agent  do  really  for  the  moment  cheer  the  weary  and 
impart  a flush  of  transient  pleasure  to  the  unwearied  who  crave  for  mirth,  its  influence 
(doubtful  even  in  these  modest  and  moderate  degrees)  is  an  infinitesimal  advantage  by  the 
side  of  an  infinity  of  evil  for  which  there  is  no  compensation  and  no  human  cure. 

It  is  easy  to  multiply  the  highest  medical  authorities  and  well  at- 
tested facts  in  support  of  the  views  of  these  eminent  gentlemen. 
Perhaps  it  is  unnecessary,  but  I will  further  trespass  upon  the  indul- 
gence of  the  Housfe  to  a limited  extent  in  this  direction.  I shall  do 
this  without  much  attention  to  classification,  as  the  bearing  of  each 
fact  upon  the  various  points  of  discussion  will  be  sufficiently  apparent, 
and  the  same  fact  often  bears  upon  the  truth  of  several  propositions. 
The  celebrated  Dr.  Carpenter,  in  his  work  on  the  use  and  abuse  of 
alcoholic  liquor,  says  : 

The  following  statement  of  the  result  of  a whole  year’s  experiment  at  brickmaking, 
made  by  two  sets  of  men — the  one  working  on  the  abstinent,  the  other  on  the  moderate 
system — is  given  by  a gentleman  of  Uxbridge,  England.  Out  of  upwards  of  23,000,000  of 
bricks  made  in  1841,  by  the  largest  maker  in  the  neighborhood,  the  average  per  man, 
made  by  the  beer-drinkers  in  the  season,  was  760,269,  while  the  average  of  the  teetotalers 
was  795,400  ; which  is  35,131  in  favor  of  the  latter  per  man.  The  highest  number  made  by 
a beer-drinker  was  880,000  ; by  a teetotaler,  890,000.  The  lowest  number  made  by  a beer* 
drinker  was  659,500  ; the  lowest  number  by  a teetotaler  was  746,000,  leaving  87,000  in  favor  of 
the  latter.  Satisfactory  as  this  account  appears,  I believe  it  would  have  been  much  more 
so  if  the  teetotalers  could  have  obtained  the  whole  gang  of  abstainers,  as  they  were  fre- 
quently hindered  by  the  drinking  of  some  of  the  gang  ; and  when  the  order  is  thus 
broken,  the  work  can  not  go  on. 

I am  informed  that  the  experience  of  the  armies  and  navies  of  En- 
gland and  America  demonstrate  that  the  soldier  or  sailor  who  abstains 
from  the  use  of  alcohol  is,  as  a rule,  more  vigorous  and  healthy  than 
the  user,  braver  and  more  reliable  in  action,  and  far  more  capable  of 
enduring  the  hardships  of  war. 

Dr.  Storer,  of  Boston,  says,  alluding  to  the  statements  of  Dr.  Day. 
superintendent  of  the  Washingtonian  Home  of  Boston  : 

Reference  has  been  made  by  the  doctor  to  the  dire  effects  so  often  seen  by  medical  men 
in^  the  persons  of  the  children  of  those  addicted  to  habits  of  intoxication — epilepsy, 
idiocy,  and  insanity,  congumital  or  subsequently  developing  themselves,  with  or  without 
any  apparent  exciting  cause.  He  has  not,  however,  I think,  sufficiently  held  up  to  tfee 
victims  of  this  baleful  thirst  the  terrible  curse  they  thus  deliberately  entail  upon  then 
descendants. 

It  is  hardly  necessary  to  remark  that  Dr.  Storer,  the  distinguished 
professor  of  obstetrics  and  diseases  of  women  in  Berkshire  Medical 
College,  is  inferior  to  no  other  authority  upon  whatever  relates  to  his 
own  specialty  in  the  practice  of  the  healing  art. 

The  report  of  the  Massachusetts  Board  of  State  Charities  for  iS6<5 
was  prepared  bv  seven  gentlemen,  three  of  them  physicians,  all  of 


lO 


Manufacture  and  Sale  of 


them  appointed  by  Governor  Andrew,  and  therefore  not  likely  to  be  a 
board  of  crazy  teetotalers.  Speaking  of  “ one  proliric  cause  of  the 
vitiation  of  the  human  stock,”  they  say; 


That  prolific  cause  is  the  common  habit  of  taking  alcohol  into  the  system,  usually  as 
the  basis  of  spirits,  wine,  or  beer.  * * The  basis  being  the  same  in  all,  the  constiiu- 
tional  effects  are  about  the  same.  The  use  of  alcohol  materially  modifies  a man’s  bodily 
condition  ; and,  so  far  as  it  affects  him  individually,  it  is  his  own  affair;  but  if  it  affects 
also  the  number  and  condition  of  his  offspring,  that  affects  society.  If  its  general  use 
does  materially  influence  the  number  and  condition  of  the  dependent  and  ctiminal 
classes,  it  is  the  duty  of  all  who  have  thought  and  care  about  social  improvement  to  con- 
sider the  matter  carefully,  and  it  is  the  special  duty  of  those  having  official  relations  with 
those  classes  to  furnish  facts  and  materials  for  public  consideration.  It  is  well  known  that 
alcohol  acts  unequally  upon  man's  nature  ; that  it  stimulates  the  lower  propensities  and 
weakens  the  higher  faculties,  ♦ * * and  represses  the  functions  v/hich  manifest  them- 
selves in  the  higher  or  human  sentiments  which  result  in  vjill.  If  the  blood,  highly  alco- 
holized, goes  to  the  brain,  its  functions  become  subverted  ; the  man  does  not  know  and 
does  not  care  what  he  says  or  does.  If  this  process  is  often  repeated  * * * the  man  is  no 
longer  under  control  of  his  voluntary  power,  hut  has  come  under  the  dominion  of  auto- 
matic functions,  which  are  almost  as  much  beyond  his  control  as  the  beating  of  his  heart. 
Any  morbid  condition  of  body  frequently  repeated  becomes  established  by  habit  ♦ ♦ * 
and  makes  him  more  liable  to  certain  diseases,  as  gout,  scrofula,  insanity,  and  the  like. 
This  liability  or  tendency  he  transmits  to  his  children  just  as  surely  as  he  transmits  like- 
ness in  form  or  feature.  * * * Now  the  use  of  alcohol  certainly  does  induce  a morbid 
condition  of  body.  It  is  morally  certain  that  the  frequent  or  the  habitual  overthrow  of 
the  conscience  and  will,  or  the  habitttai  'weakening  of  them,  soon  establishes  a morbid 
condition,  with  morbid  appetites  and  tendencies,  and  that  those  appetites  and  tendencies 
are  surely  transmitted  to  the  offspring.  • 

Again,  it  is  admitted  that  an  intemperate  mother  nurses  her  babe  with  alcoholized 
milk;  but  it  is  not  enough  considered  that  a father  to  his  offspring  certain  ten- 

dencies which  lead  surely  to  craving  for  stimulants.  These  cravings  once  indulged  grow 
to  a passion,  the  vehemence  of  which  passes  the  comprehension  of  common  men. 

Among  the  Greeks,  the  prohibition,  of  intoxicating  wines  (distilled 
liquors  were  unknown)  was  enforced  by  the  severest  penalties.  “ Plato, 
Aristotle,  Plutarch,  and  others  have  noticed  the  hereditar\’  transmis- 
sion of  intemperate  propensities,  and  the  legislation  that  imposed 
abstinence  upon  women  had  unquestionably  in  view  the  greater  vigor 
of  the  offspring  — ‘ healthy  minds  in  a healthy  body.’  That  indul- 
gence in  the  use  of  strong  drink  by  expectant  mothers  would  be  in- 
jurious to  them  and  their  offspring  was  known  to  the  learned  and 
wise  among  the  ancients.”  “ The  Romans  had  a prohibitory  law 
which  forbade  intoxicating  wine,  while  it  allowed  the  pure  juice.” 
(See  the  very  learned  treatise  of  Rev.  Dr.  William  Patton,  of  New 
York  City,  upon  Bible  wines,  published  in  1874,  fora  great  mass  of 
valuable  information  upon  this  subject). 

Willard  Parker,  M.D.,  of  New  York,  in  an  address  to  the  American 
Association  for  the  Cure  of  Inebriates,  says  : 


i 


-a  What  is  Alcohol?  The  answer  is,  a poison.  It  is  so  regarded  by  the  best  writers  and 
W teachers  on  toxicologjr.  I refer  to  Orfila,  Christison,  and  the  like,  who  class  it  with  ar- 
I scnic,  corosive  sublimate,  and  prussic  acid.  Like  these  poisons  when  introduced  into  the 
i ; system,  it  is  capable  of  destroying  life  without  acting  mechanically.  Introduced  into  the 
system  it  induces  a general  disease,  as  well  marked  as  intermittent  fever,  small-pox,  or 
. lead  poison. 


^ And  in  a public  address  the  same  distinguished  gentleman  declares 
“that  one-third  of  all  the  deaths  in  the  city  of  New  York  are  the  re- 
sult, dire/,  tly  or  indirectly,  of  the  use  of  alcohol ; and  that  within  the 
last  thirty-eight  years  100,000  persons  in  that  city  have  died  of  its  use. 
either  by  themselves  or  their  parents.” 

And  in  a letter  to  Rev.  Dr.  Patton,  which  the  latter  cites  in  his 
“ Bible  Y’ines  ” above  referred  to.  Dr.  Parker  sa\-s  : 


Alcohol  is  the  one  evil  genius,  whether  in  wine,  or  ale,  or  whisky,  and  is  killing  the 
of  men.  Stay  the  ravages  of  this  one  poison,  alcohol,  that  king  of  poisons,  the  mightiest 
hreapoD  of  the  devil,  and  the  millennium  will  soon  dawn. 


Intoxicating  Liquors, 


tl 


the  fact  largely  to  intoxicating  liquors  primarily  and  in- 
di  cctiy,  the  Board  of  State  Charities  of  Pennsylvania  state  that  “in 
ca/cful  hreed-ng  of  cattle  at  least  96  per  cent,  come  to  maturity,  and 
of  horses  95  per  cent,  in  our  northern  climate,  \s’hile  of  the  infinite'y 
more  precious  race  of  men  at  least  33  per  cent,  perish  in  the  bud  oi 
infancy  or  blossom  of  early  youth.’’ 

Great  God  ! I stagger  in  the  effort  to  grasp  these  statistics  of  death. 
Are  these  the  dreams  of  scientific  madmen.?  Truth  is  not  oniy  stran- 
ger than  fiction,  but  infinitely  more  horrible.  And  the  tide  of  testi- 
mony rolls  on. 

In  1874,  Dr.  James  Edmunds,  a very  distinguished  English  physi- 
cian, delivered  a course  of  lectures  upon  the  medical  use  of  alcohol 
and  stimulants  for  women,  in  New  York  City,  which  were  published. 
He  says,  page  9 ; 

It  is  admitted  by  every  one  that  alcohol  is  the  cause  of  more  than  half  the  insanity  we 
have,  i am  not  so  familiar  with  the  facts  on  this  subject  here  as  I should  natural!}'  be  at 
the  other  side  of  the  Atlantic.  * * * I know  this:  that  Lord  Shaftesbury,  the  chair- 
man of  our  commission  on  lunacy  in  England,  has  said  in  a parliamentary  report  on  the 
Subject,  that  six  out  of  ten  lunatics  in  our  asylums  are  made  lunatic  by  the  use  of  alcohol. 
It  is  a fact  which  can  not  be  disputed  that  diseases  of  the  liver,  diseases  of  the  lungs, 
diseases  of  the  tissues  of  the  body,  are  induced  directly  by  the  use  of  alcohol,  and  that 
as  a general  rule  you  may  say  that  where  you  have  alcohol  used  jnost  largely  and  most 
frequently,  there  these  diseases  and  degenerations  in  the  tissues  of  the  body  become  most 
marked.  I could  give  you  very  authoritative  facts  bearing  upon  this  matter  from  sources 
which  are  not  open  to  the  imputation  of  any  kind  of  moral  bias,  as  the  utterances  of  some 
of  our  temperance  friends  may  be  open  to. 

Now  recollect  that  food  is  that  which  puts  strength  into  a man,  and  stimulant  is  that 
which  gets  strength  out  of  a man  ; so  that  when  you  want  to  use  stimulant,  recollect  that 
you  are  using  that  which  will  exhaust  the  last  panicles  of  strength,  with  a facility  with 
which  your  body  would  not  otherwise  part  with  them.  If  a man  takes  a pint  of  brandy 
what  do  we  see?  It  intoxicate.^,  it  poisons  him.  Of  course  you  know  intoxicant  is  a 
modification  of  the  Greek  word  toxicon.  The  man  who  is  intoxicated  is  poisoned  ; we 
Rimply  use  a Greek  instead, of  a Saxon  word  for  it.  We  see  a man  intoxicated.  What  are 
the  phenomena  we  see  then  ? A man  lies  on  his  back  snoring,  helpless,  senseless.  If  you 
set  him  up,  he  falls  down  again  like  a sack  of  potatoes.  If  you  try  to  rouse  him.  you  get 
nothing  out  of  him  but  a grunt.  Is  that  the  effect  of  a stimulant,  do  you  think  ? I should 
think  it  is  the  effect  of  a paralyzer  that  you  have — mind,  and  body,  and  nerve,  and  muscle 
all  equally  and  uniformly  paralyzed  right  through.  * * Alcohol  in  a large  dose  is  a 

narcotic  poison,  which  paralyzes  the  body  and  stupefies  the  mind.  If  a man  takes  a some- 
what larger  dose,  what  do  you  see  then  ? You  see  that  snoring  and  breathing  come  to  ai* 
end — you  see  that  the  soft,  flabby  pulsation  of  the  heart  ceases  ; that  the  spark  of  life 
goes  out,  and  the  man  can  not  hi  resuscitated.  In  fact,  there  are  more  men  killed,  so  faj 
as  I know  English  statistics,  more  men  poisoned  in  that  way  by  alcohol  than  are  poisoned 
by  all  other  poison*  put  together.  We  have  a great  horror  of  arsenic  and  fifty  other 
things  ; the  fact  is,  that  all  these  other  things  are  a mere  bagt.telle  in  relation  to  the  most 
direct,  absolute,  immediate,  and  certain  poisonings  which  are  caused  by  alcohol. 

Colonel  J.  G.  Dudley,  of  New  York  City,  has  published  a valuable 
pamphlet  reviewing  this  subject  and  carefully  collating  the  opinions  of 
the  leading  medical  writers  of  the  last  fifty  or  seventy-five  years,  such 
as  Orfila.  Christison,  Dr.  Taylor,  Pereira,  Professor  Binz,  Dr.  Lalle- 
mand,  Perrin,  Dr.  Willard  Parker,  Professor  Edmund  A.  Parkes,  Pro- 
fessor Durov  Dumorel,  Magnus,  Dunglison,  Dr.  James  Edmunds, 
Poweii,  Proiessor  N.  S Davis,  Dermarquay,  Wetherbee,  Burns,  Dick- 
inson, and  others,  all  of  whom  agree  in  deciding  that  alcohol  is  a narcot 
ico-acrid  poison. 

Take  now  the  following  table  from  Nelson’s  Vital  Statistics,  which 
Professor  Parkes  adopts  and  indorses  in  his  gieat  work  on  hygiene, 

f)age  270.  These  deductions  were  drawn  from  observations  upon  the 
ives  of  three  hundred  and  fifty-seven  persons. 

Whatever  else  the  American  Congress  and  people  may  disagree  upon 
I think  it  will  generally  be  conceded  that  life-insurance  companies 
know  what  they  are  about. 


12 


Manufacture  and  Sale  of 


A temperate  pew  ,n’s  chance  of  living  i 


At  20 44.2  years  I 

30 .36.5  years 

40  ...  ,28.8  years 

50  21.25  years 

60 14.285  years 


An  intemperate  person’s  chance  cf  living 
is — 

At  20. . . . 15.6  years 

30 13.*  yean 

40  I ; .6  years 

50 .10.8  years 

60  8.9  yean 


Take  now  the  following'  tables  upon  the  basis  of  which  they  do  busi- 
ness, and  which  are  unquestionably  as  reliable  as  the  keenest  observa- 
tion continued  for  many  years  can  construct.  This  first  table  is  pre- 
pared by  Dr.  Edward  Jarvis,  a distinguished  American  statist. 


Ages  of  persons. 

Deaths  in  100,000. 

Comparative  rate  of 
mortaliij. 

Intempe- 

rate. 

Tempe- 

rate. 

Intempe- 

rate. 

Others. 

15  to  20  years 

1.342 

730 

18 

xo 

20  to  30  years 

4»953 

974 

51 

10 

40  to  50  years 

5>992 

1,452 

41 

10 

50  to  60  years  

6,418 

2,254 

29 

10 

60  to  90  years 

46,174 

33,260 

13 

xo 

Comparative  rate  of  deaths  in  equal  numbers  of  intemperate  and 

temperate  persons  of  all  ages,  the  same  year 

32 

10 

The  following  is  from  Carpenter  on  Physiology.  It  compares  fou' 
general  insurance  companies  with  one  temperance  provident  institu 
tion.  And  it  should  be  noted  that  this  is  a comparison  of  teetotaler' 
on  the  one  hand  with  teetotalers  and  nisderate  or  temperate  drinkers 
combined  on  the  other  : 


Policies 

issued. 

944 

1,901 

833 

2,470 

1,596 

Company  D 

Number  of  ’ -c  \ ^ 
deaths.  ! 

14  15  per  thousand. 

27  ! 14  per  thousand. 

11  ! 13  per  thousand. 

65  j 26  per  thousand. 

12  7i  pei  thousand. 


The  first  table  shows  an  average  mortality  more  than  three  times  as 
large  among  the  intemperate  as  among  the  temperate,  and  the  other 
more  than  two  and  one-half  times  larger  in  the  general  companies  than 
in  the  temperance  institution. 

Dr.  Carpenter  also  indorses  a certificate,  of  which  the  following  is 
one  paragraph,  which  he  says  was  signed  by  more  than  two  thousand 
physicians  of  all  grades  and  degrees,  from  the  court  physicians  and 
leading  metropolitan  surgeons  to  the  humble  country  practitioner: 

We  the  undersigned  are  of  opinion  — 

First.  That  a very  large  proportion  of  human  misery,  including  pov'crty,  disease,  and 
crime,  is  induced  by  the  use  of  alcohol  or  fermented  liquors  as  beverages. 

The  evidence  of  this  character  is  entirely  inexhaustible,  and  I close 
it  with  the  following  “declaration”  by  the  uncontradicted  voice  of  the 
medical  orofession  of  New  York  City  and  vicinity; 


Intoxicating  Liquors. 


13 


THE  VOICE  OF  SCIENCE  AGAINST  ALCOHOL. 


MEDICAL  DECLARATION. 


1.  In  view  of  the  alarming  prevalence  and  ill  effects  of  intemperance, 
with  which  none  are  so  familiar  as  members  of  the  medical  pro- 
fession, and  which  have  called  forth  from  eminent  English  physicians 
the  voice  of  warning  to  the  people  of  Great  Britain  concerning  the 
use  of  alcoholic  beverages,  we,  the  undersigned,  members  of  the 
medical  profession  of  New  York  and  vicinity,  unite  in  the  declaration 
that  we  believe  alcohol  should  be  classed  with  other  powerful  drugs ; 
that,  when  prescribed  medicinally,  it  should  be  with  conscientious 
caution,  and  a sense  of  grave  responsibility. 

2.  “We  are  of  opinion  that  the  use  of  alcoholic  liquor  as  a beverage  is 
productive  of  a large  amount  of  physical  disease;  that  it  entails 
diseased  appetites  upon  offspring ; and  that  it  is  the  cause  of  a large 
percentage  of  the  crime  and  pauperism  of  our  cities  and  country. 

3.  "We  would  welcome  any  judicious  and  effective  legislation — State 
and  National — which  should  seek  to  confine  the  traffic  in  alcohol  to  the 
legitimate  purposes  of  medical  and  other  sciences,  art,  and  mechanism. 


Edward  Delavield,  M.D., . 
President  College  of  Physicians  and 
Surgeons,  and  of  Roosevelt  Hospi- 
tal. 

Willard  Parker,  M.D., 

Ex-President  Academy  of  Medicine. 

A.  Clark,  M.D., 

Professor  College  of  Physicians  and 
Suvgeons,  and  Senior  Physician 
Bellevue  Hospital. 

James  Anderson,  M.D.,  No.  30 
University  Place, 

Ex-President  Academy  of  Medicine, 
and  President  Physicians’  Mutual 
Aid  Association. 

E.  R.  Peaslee,  M.D., 

Ex-President  Academy  of  Medicine 
(N.  Y.) 

C.  R.  Agnew,  M.D., 

Ex- President  Medical  Society  of  the 
state  of  New  York. 

Stephen  Smith,  M.D., 

Surgeon  Bellevue  Hospital,  Com- 
missioner ol  Health,  and  President 
American  Health  Association. 

Alfred  C.  Post,  M.D.,  LL.D., 
Professor  of  Surgery  in  University 
Medical  College,  and  Ex-President 
N.  Y.  Academy  of  Medicine. 

E.  D.  Hudson,  Jr.,  M.D., 

Professor  of  Theory  and  Practice  of 
Medicine,  Woman’s  Medical  Col- 
lege of  N.  Y.  Infirmary. 


Erasmus  D.  Hudson,  M.D., 
Physician  and  Surgeon. 

Elisha  Harris,  M.D., 

Secretary  American  Public  Health 
Association,  late  Sanitary  Super- 
intendent Metropolitan  Board  of 
Health,  and  Cor  responding  Secre 
tary  Prison  Association  of  New 
York. 

Ellsworth  Eliot,  M.D., 

President  of  the  New  York  County 
Medical  Society. 

Stephen  Rogers,  M.D., 

President  of  the  Medico-Legal 
Society  of  New  York. 

Andrew  H.  Smith,  M.D., 

Visiting  Physician  to  St.  Luke’s 
Hospital,  etc. 

J.  E.  Janvrin,  M.D. 

Verranus  Morse,  M.D.,  Brook- 
lyn. 

E.  T.  Richardson,  M.D.,  Brook- 
lyn. 

William  H.  Hall,  M.D. 

Walter  R.  Gillette,  M.D., 
Physician  to  Charity  Hospital,  Lec- 
turer University  Medical  College. 

J.  R.  Beaming,  M.D., 

Physician  to  St.  Luke’s  Hospital, 
President  University  Alumni  Asso- 
ciation, Emeritus  Professor  of 
Medicine,  etc. 


14 


Manufacture  and  Sale  of 


James  O.  Pond,  M.D., 

Treasurer  N.  Y.  Academy  of  Medi- 
cine. 

Theodore  L.  Mason,  M.D., 

Lonsultin:<  Surgeon  Kings  Co.  In- 
ebnates’  lioiiie.  Coii.-ulting  Sur- 
geon Long  island  College  tlospi- 
tal,  etc.,  and  LTesident  collegiate 
Depaitmeiit. 

G.  J.  Fisher,  M.D., 

Late  Vice-I’resident  New  York  State 
Medical  Society,  late  President 
Westchester  County  Medical  So- 
ciety, etc. 

George  W.  Hall,  M.D.,  Brook- 
lyn. 

John  A.  Jenkins,  M.D.,  Brook- 
lyn. 

J.  L.  Little,  M.D., 

Lecturer  College  of  Physicians  and 
Surgeons,  New  York  ; Surgeon  to 
St.  Luke's  Hospital. 

W.  F.  Sanford,  M.D.,  Brooklyn. 

S.  Fleet  Spier,  M.D., 

Surgeon  Brooklyn  City  Hospital, 
Surgeon  Brooklyn  Eye  and  Ear 
Infirmary,  etc. 

John  M.  Cdyler,  M.D., 

Surgeon  United  States  Army,  Medi- 
cal Di.'-ector  Department  of  the 
East,  New  York. 

Martyn  Paine,  M.D.,  LL.D., 
Emeri'us  Professor  University  Medi- 
cal College. 

Augustus  G.  Elliot,  M.D., 

Ex-Phy-ician  Be  levue  Hospital,  and 
New  York  Institute  for  Deaf  and 
Dumb 

Eobert  W.atts,  M.D., 

Visiting  Physician  Charity  Hospital, 
aud  to  the  Roosevelt  Hospital. 

Henry  A.  Stiles,  M.D., 

Sanitary  Inspector  Board  of  Health. 

A.  D.  Rockwell,  M.D., 

Electro-TherapeutistNew  York  State 
Woman’s  Hospital. 

A.  B.  He  Luna,  M.D., 

Visiting  Physician  Northwestern 
Dispetisary,  New  York. 

Robert  Taylor,  M.D., 

Attending  Physician  for  Diseases  of 
the  Throat  and  l.ungs.  Northwest- 
ern Dispensary,  42d  Street  and 
Ninth  Avenue.  New  York. 

M.  A.  Wilson,  M.D  , 

Attending  Physician  New  York  Dis- 
pensaty,  Northwestern  Dispensa- 
ry, Member  of  the  County  Medical 
Society,  and  Medical  Libra  ■■y  ai;d  , 
Journal  Association,  103  WestSOth  I 
Street. 

Paluel  de  Marmon,  M D., 

Physician  to  the  Academy  of  Mount 
St.  Vincent. 

William  B.  Eager,  M.D., 
Physician  to  Charity  Hospital. 


Frank  H.  Hamilton,  M.D., 
LL.D., 

Surgeon  Bellevue  Hospital,  and  St. 
Francis’s  Hospital;  Professor  of 
Practice  of  Surgery  in  Bellevue 
Hospital  Medical  college. 

F.  L.  Harris,  JM.D.,  No.  43  East 
30tli  Street, 

Late  Deputy  Health  Ofificer  of  the 
Port  of  New  York. 

Eben  Storer,  M.D.,  No.  47  East 

30th  Street. 

E.  S.  Dunster,  M.D., 

Professor  of  Obstetrics  in  the  Long 
Island  College  Hospital,  and  the 
Medical  Department  of  Dartmouth 
College;  Resident  Physician  In- 
fants’ Hospital,  Randall's  Island. 
Mrs.  Mary  C.  Brown,  M.D., 
Brooklyn. 

Walter  Pardee,  M.D.,  No.  248 

West  34th  Street. 

Edward  Bayard,  M.D.,  No.  8 

West  40th  Street. 

Lewis  Hallock,  M.D. 

A.  N.  Bell,  M.D., 

Editor  of  The  Sanitarian. 

R.  C.  Moffat,  M.D.,  Brooklyn. 
Sar.ah  M.  Ellis,  M.D., 

Late  Professor  of  Anatomy  New 
York  Medical  College  for  Women. 
Edwin  West,  M.D.,  No.  42  West 
Washing-ton  Place. 

WiLLiAJi  J.  Bauer,  M.D.,  No.  13 

East  33d  Street. 

D. cniel  H.  Hastings,  M.D.,  No. 
214  W est  28th  Street. 

S.  T.  Birds.all,  M.D. 

A.  Houghton  Birdsall,  M.D. 
Ernst  T.  Hoffm.an,  M.D. 

John  Ellis,  M.D., 

Author  of  the  “ Avoidable  Causes  of 
Di-^ease.” 

H.A.NS  Powell,  M.D., 

Surgeon-General  Grand  Army  of  the 
Republic. 

H.  S.  Giebert,  M.D.,  Brooklyn. 
Eliz.abetii  S.  Ad.cms,  M.D.,  No. 
156  West  23d  Street, 

Physician  New  York  iledical  Coilege 
lor  Women. 

George  Newby,  M.D.,  No.  160 
West  16th  Street. 

S.  Sw.cn,  M.D.,  No.  13  West  3Sth 
Street. 

E.  B.  Belden,  M.D.,  Alenander 
Hutchins,  M.D.,  No.  796  De 
Kalb  Avenue,  Brooklyn. 

Edwin  T.  Ward,  M.D. 

J.  W.  G.  Clements,  M.IX 


Intoxicating  Liquors, 


15 


Warren  Freeman,  M.D.,  No.  89 
West  36tli  Street. 

William  Detmold,  M.D. 
Nathan  Bozeman,  M.D. 

Edmund  Fowler,  M.D. 

John  Purcell,  M.D.,  No.  51 
Henry  Street. 

E.  D.  Morgan,  Jr.,  M.D., 

Attending  Fhysician  Brick  Church 
Chapel  Oispensaiy,  Physician  New 
York  Post-Office. 

J.  A.  Williams,  No.  256  West 
84th  Street. 

J.  B. Elliott,  M.D.,  No.  493  Clin- 
ton Ave.,  Brooklyn. 

B.  F.  Underwood,  M.D., 

Treasurer  Kings  County  Homoeo- 
pathic Medical  Society. 

Samuel  S.  Gur,  M.D., 

Ex-President  New  York  State  Ho- 
mcenpathio  Medical  Society,  Ex- 
President  American  Institute  01 
Homoeopathy,  etc. 

J.  W.  Dowling,  M.D.,  No.  568 
Fifth  Avenue, 

Registrar  and  Professor  of  Practice 
New  York  Homoeopathic  Medical 
College. 

Homer  J.  Ostrom,  M.D.,  No.  568 
Fifth  Avenue. 

Henry  Minton,  M.D., 

Ex-Presidet-r,  Homosopathic  Medical 
{Society  Counny. 

C.  B.  McQuesten,  M.D. 

Charles  E.  Blumenthal,  M.D., 

LL.D., 

Chairman  Medical  Board  of  Hahne- 
mann Hospital. 

M.  Freligh, 

Author  of  “ Practice  of  Medicine 
and  Materia  Medica.” 

Edwin  G.  Freligh,  M.D.,- 
Toxicological  and  Analytical  Chem- 
ist. 

S.  P.  Burdick,  M.D., 

Professor  of  Obstetrics,  Homoeopa- 
thic Medical  College,  New  York. 

D.  A.  Gorhu,  M.D.,  Brooklyn. 

H.  P.  Patridge.  M.D. 

Fred.  Elliot,  M.D. 

Jared  G.  Baldwin,  M.D.,  No.  8 
East  41st  Street. 

W.  H.  Scott,  M.D.,  No.  8 East 
41st  Street. 

F.  F.  Allen,  M.D. 

Frank  Bond,  A.B.,  M.D.,  No.  27 
Schernierhoru  Street,  Brooklyn. 
Albert  E.  Sumner,  M.D., 

Medical  Director  Brooklyn  Homoeo- 
pathic Hospital. 

W.  M.  Pratt,  M.D. 


D.  Simmons,  M.D. 

May  H.  Everett,  M.D. 

Jennie  Ensign,  M.D. 

B.  F.  JosLiN,  M.D. 

B.  F.  Bowers,  M.D., 

Ex-President  New  York  County 
Homoeopathic  Medical  Society. 
Wilson  Peterson,  M.D., 
Physician. 

Charles  F.  Rodgers,  M.D. 
Edward  C.  Frays,  M.D. 

Alice  Boole  Campbell,  M.D., 
No.  114  South  3<i  Street,  Brook- 
lyn. 

F.  Seeger,  M.D., 

Chief  Physician  Hahnemann  Hos- 
pital, New  York. 

E.  J.  Whitney,  M.D., 

Visiting  Physician  Brooklyn  Ho- 
moeopathic Hospital. 

J.  A.  Bennett,  M.D.,  No.  121 
Second  Avenue. 

M.  A.  Tinker,  M.D.,  No.  572 
Henry  Street,  Brooklyn. 

W.  M.  Chamberlin,  M.D., 

Physician  to  Charity  Hospital  and 
Demilt  Dispensary. 

W.  Hanford  White,  M.D.,  No. 

1 West  34th  Street. 

M.  W.  Palmer,  AI.D. 

A.  S.  Ball,  M.D. 

B.  G.  Bartlett,  M.D. 

B.  L.  Cetlinski,  M.D., 

New  Haven  (Ct.)  Homoeopathic  Dis- 
pensary. 

Albert  Wright,  M.D.,  Brook- 
lyn. 

W.  M.  L.  Fiske,  M.D. , Brooklyn. 
Sarah  E.  Bissell,  M.D.,  No. 
104  East  17th  Street. 

C.  H.  Bronson,  M.D.,  Brooklyn. 
Samuel  Talmage,  Brooklyn. 
William  D.  McDonald,  M.D., 

N.  Y.  Homceopathic  Medical  Col- 
lege. 

J.  F.  TAlmage,  M.D.,  Brooklyn. 
A.  J.  Palmer,  M.D.,  Brooklyn. 
Samuel  W illets. 

President  Woman’s  Medical  College 
of  the  New  t ork  Infirmary. 
Henry  C.  Houghton,  M.D., 

Prof,  of  Physiology  N.  Y.  Medical 
Col'ege  for  Women,  Visiting  Phy- 
sician Five  Points  House  of  In- 
dustry, etc. 

J.  L.  Brown,  M.D.,  No.  51  West 
36th  Street. 

George  I.  Bbnnbt,  M.D.,  Brook- 
lyn. 


Manufacture  ajid  Sale  of 


l6 

While  there  is  a large  array  of  eminent  medical  authorities  which 
incline  to  the  belief  that  the  moderate  use  of  ferme)ited\\Q^ox%  is  not 
injurious  and  is  often  beneficial  to  health,  yet  the  concurring  senti- 
ment of  the  medical  world  is  against  the  use  of  distilled  alcoholic 
beverages.  But  the  weight  of  the  latest  and  best  medical  and  scien- 
tific opinion  largely  preponderates  in  favor  of  the  position  that  alco 
hoi  is  simply  a poison,  and  should  never  be  introduced  to  the  human 
organism,  even  in  the  forms  of  fermentation,  except  as  an  antidote  for 
disease,  like  arsenic,  str>’chnine,  prussic  acid,  or  any  other  powerful, 
but  poisonous  agency.  I do  not  propose  to  enter  this  field  of  discus- 
sion so  far  as  the  light  domestic  wines  and  drinks  of  the  people  are  con- 
cerned. It  is  not  essential  to  the  grounds  of  my  argument  in  support 
of  the  proposed  amendment.  It  is  only  just,  however,  that  the  po.si- 
tion  of  the  medical  profession  upon  the  influence  of  alcohol  in  any 
form  of  administration  upon  the  human  system  should  be  fairly  stated, 
and,  if  in  so  doing  it  shall  have  appeared  that  the  preponderance 
of  opinion  is  against  the  use  of  fermetited  as  well  as  distilled  liquors, 
it  is  no  fault  of  mine.  It  will  strengthen  the  argument  against  the 
stronger  and  more  concentrated  poison,  if  it  shall  be  found  or  believed 
that  fermented  liquors  contain  enough  of  the  pernicious  spirit  of  wine, 
which  one  of  Shakespeare’s  immortal  characters  stigmatizes  as  “ devil," 
to  endanger  the  physical,  mental,  and  moral  organism  of  those  who 
indulge  in  their  habitual  use. 

FACTS  AND  STATISTICS  FROM  THE  CENSUS  AND  OTHER  SOURCES, 
MOSTLY  OFFICIAL. 

I now  desire  to  present  in  the  best  manner  I can  a statement  of 
facts  bearing  upon  the  effect  of  the  manufacture  and  use  of  into.xi- 
cating  liquors  on  the  wealth,  industries,  and  productive  powers  of  the 
nation ; also  upon  its  ignorance,  pauperism,  and  crime.  1 have  en- 
deavored to  authenticate  every  statement  by  careful  inquiry'.  The 
information  is  drawn  from  the  census  returns,  from  records  of  the 
Departments  of  Government,  reports  of  State  authorities,  declarations 
from  prominent  statisticians  and  responsible  gentlemen  in  different 
parts  of  the  country.  Much  of  it  is  to  be  found,  with  a great  deal 
more  of  similar  matter,  in  a very  valuable  book  published  the  present 
year.  The  author  is  William  Hargreaves,  M.D.,  of  Philadelphia. 
No  one  who  has  not  fought  with  figures,  like  old  Paul  with  the  beasts 
at  Ephesus,  knows  how  it  taxes  the  utmost  powers  of  man  to  classify, 
condense,  and  present  intelligibly  to  the  mind  the  mathematical  or 
statistical  demonstration  of  these  tremendous  social  and  economic 
facts.  The  truths  they  teach  involve  the  fate  of  modem  civilization. 

In  1870  the  tax  collected  by  the  Internal  Revenue  Department  was 
upon  72,425,353  gallons  of  proof  spirits  and  6,081,520  barrels  of  fer- 
mented liquors.  Commissioner  Delano  estimates  the  consumption  of 
distilled  spirits  in  1869  at  8o,ooo,coo  gallons.  By  the  census  returns 
June  I,  i860,  there  were  prodicced  in  the  United  States  90,412.581 
gallons  of  domestic  spirits — and  of  couise  this  was  consumed,  with 
large  amounts  imported  besides — but  there  are  verv'  large  items  which 
escape  the  official  enumeration.  These  have  been  carefully  cstLnatcd 
as  follow  s : 


Intoxicating  Liquors. 


17 


Gallont, 

Domestic  liquors  tvad  ng  tax  and  imported  smuggled,  at  least 5.000,000 

Domestic  wines ....  10,000, coa 

Domestic  wines  made  on  farms  3,092, -330 

Domestic  wines  made  and  used  in  private  families i,ooo,vX)a 

Dilutions  of  liquors  paying  tax  by  dealers 7,500,000 


26,592,330 

This  amount  added  to  the  total  produced  in  i860  would  be  107,004,- 
91 1 ; added  to  amount  on  which  was  collected  tax  in  1870  would  be 
99,017,683. 

It  is  well  known  that  the  great  mass  of  alcoholic  liquor  is  consumed 
as  a beverage,  and  it  will  fall  below  the  fact  to  place  the  amount  paid 
for  it  at  retail  by  the  American  drinker  at  75,000,000  gallons  yearly. 
But  take  the  very  modest  estimate  of  Dr.  Young,  Chief  of  the  Bureau 
of  Statistic^,  who  makes  the  following  estimate  of  the  sales  of  liquors 
in  the  fiscal  year  ending  June  i,  1871  : 

Whisky,  (alone) 60,000,000  gallons  at  $6,  at  retail $360,000,000 

Imported  spirits 2,500,000  gallons  at  $10,  at  retail 25,000,000 

Imported  wine 10,700,000  gallons  at  $5,  at  retail  53,500,000 

Ale,  beer,  and  porter 6,500,000  gallons  at  $20  a bbl.  at  retail 130,000,000 

Native  wines,  brandies,  cordials,  estimated 31,500,000 

Total 600,000,000 

I am  satisfied  that  this  is  much  below  the  real  amount,  but  it  is 
enough. 

This  is  one-seventh  the  value  of  all  our  manufactures  for  that  year, 
more  than  one-fourth  that  of  farm  productions,  betterments,  and  stock, 
as  shown  by  the  census. 

Dr.  Hargreaves  estimates  the  retail  liquor  bill  of  1 87 1 at  $680,036,042. 
In  1872,  as  shown  by  the  internal  revenue  returns,  there  was  a total 
of  domestic  and  foreign  liquors  shown  into  the  hands  of  the  American 
people  of  337,288,066  gallons,  the  retail  cost  of  which  at  the  estimated 
prices  of  Dr.  Young  is  $735,720,048.  The  total  of  liquors  paying  tax 
from  i860  to  1872 — thirteen  years — was  2,762,926,066  gallons,  costing 
the  consumer  $6,780,161,805.  During  several  of  these  years  the  Gov- 
ernment was  largely  swindled  out  of  the  tax,  so  that  no  mortal  knows 
how  far  the  truth  lies  beyond  these  startling  aggregates. 

Dr.  Young  estimates  the  cost  of  liquors  in  1867  at  the  same  as  in 
1871 — $600,000,000 — and  exclaims:  “It  would  pay  for  100,000,000 
barrels  of  flour,  averaging  two  and  or.e-half  barrels  to  every  man,  wom- 
an, and  child  in  the  country. 

Sucf  facts  might  well  transform  .the  mathematician  into  an  excla- 
mation point.  Dr.  Hargreaves,  who  goes  into  all  the  ininutia  of  the 
demonstration,  dealing,  however,  only  with  bureau  returns,  declares 
thit  the  annual  consumption  of  distilled  spirits  in  the  United  States 
is  not  less  than  100,000,000  gallons  annually,  and  this  makes  a very 
small  allowance  for  “ crooked  whisky.”  Take  now  Dr.  Young’s  mod- 
erate estimate  of  $600,000,000  annually,  and  relying  upon  the  official 
records  of  the  country,  and  in  sixteen  years  we  have  destroyed  in  drink 
$9,600,000,000 — more  than  four  times  the  amount  of  the  national  debt, 
and  once  and  a half  times  the  whole  cost  of  the  war  of  the  rebellion 
to  all  sections  of  the  country,  while  the  loss  of  life,  health,  spiritual 
force,  and  moral  power  to  the  people  was  beyond  comparison  greater. 
The  lowest  estimate  I have  seen  of  the  annual  loss  of  life  directly  from 


i8 


Manufacture  and  Sale  of 


the  use  of  intoxicating  liquor  is  60,000,  or  960,000  during  the  prenod 
above  mentioned  ; more  than  three  times  the  whole  loss  of  the  North 
by  battle  and  disease  in  the  war,  as  shown  by  the  official  returns. 

The  assessed  value  of  all  the  real  estate  in  the  United  States  is 
$9,914,780,825  ; of  personal,  $4,264,205,907.  In  twenty-five  years  we 
drink  ourselves  out  of  the  value  of  our  country,  personal  property  and 
all. 

The  census  shows  that  in  1870  the  State  of  New  York  spent  for 
liquors,  $106,590,000;  more  than  two-fifths  of  the  value  of  products  of 
agriculture  and  nearly  one-seventh  the  value  of  all  the  manufactures, 
and  nearly  two-thirds  of  the  wages  paid  for  both  agriculture  and  man- 
ufactures, the  liquor  bill  being  little  less  than  twice  the  receipts  of  her 
railroads.  The  liquor  bill  of  Pennsylvania  in  1870  was  $65,075,000; 
of  Illinois,  $42,825,000;  Ohio,  $58,845,000 -Massachusetts,  $25,195,000; 
New  Hampshire,  $5,800,000  ; Maine,  whCTe  the  prohibitory  law  is  bet- 
ter enforced  than  anywhere  else,  $4,215,000,  although  Maine  has  twice 
the  population  of  New  Hampshire. 

Dr.  Hargreaves  says  that  there  was  expended  for  intoxicating  drinks 
in — 


1869, 

1870. 
1871  , 
1872. 


$693,999,509 
6x9,425,1x0 
. 680,036,04a 
735,726,048 


Total 


2,729,186,709 


Annual  average  682,296,677 

And  he  says  the  average  is  larger  since  1872,  exceeding  $700,000,000. 

Each  family  by  the  census  averages  5.09  persons,  and  we  spend  for 
liquor  at  the  rate  of  $81.74  yearly  for  each.  The  loss  to  the  nation  in 
perverted  labor  is  very  great.  In  1872  there  were  7,276  licensed  whole- 
sale liquor  establishments  and  161,144  persons  licensed  to  sell  at  re- 
tail. It  is  said  that  there  are  as  many  more  unlicensed  retail  liquor 
shops.  All  these  places  of  traffic  must  employ  at  least  half  a million 
of  men.  There  were  then  3,132  distilleries,  which  would  employ  cer- 
tainly five  men  each — say,  1 5,660.  The  brewer’s  congress  in  1874  said 
that  there  were  employed  in  their  business  11,698.  There  would  be 
miscellaneously  employed  about  breweries  and  distilleries  10,000;  in 
selling,  say,  500,000.  In  all,  say,  550,000  able-bodied  men,  who,  so  far 
as  distilled  liquors  are  concerned  at  least,  constitute  a standing  army 
constantly  destroying  the  American  people.  They  create  more  havoc 
than  an  opposing  nation  which  should  maintain  a hostile  force  of  half 
a million  armed  men  constantly  making  war  against  us  upon  our  own 
soil.  The  temple  of  this  Janus  is  always  open.  Why  should  we  thus 
persevere  in  self-destruction  } 

There  are  600,000  habitual  drunkards  in  the  United  States.  If  they 
lose  half  their  time  it  would  be  a loss  of  $150,000,000  to  the  nation  in 
productive  power  and  in  wages  and  wealth  to  both  the  nation  and 
themselves  every  year. 

Dr.  Hargreaves  has  constructed  the  following  table  ; 


The  yearly  loss  of  time  and  industry  of  545,624  men  employed  in  liquor- 
making and  selling 

Loss  of  time  and  industry  of  600,000  drunkards 

Loss  of  time  of  1,404,323  male  tipplers 


$272,8x2,000 

150,000,000 

146,849,592 


Total 


• $5^186]  «590 


Intoxicating  Liquors.  19 

And  he  adds  that  investigation  will  show  this  large  aggregate  is 
far  below  the  true  loss. 

By  this  same  process  40,000,000  busnels  of  nutritious  grain  are  an- 
nually destroyed,  equal  to  600,000,000  four-pound  loaves ; about  80 
loaves  for  each  family  in  the  country. 

Dr.  Hitchcock,  president  of  Michigan  State  Board  of  Health,  esti- 
mates the  annual  loss  of  productive  life  by  reason  of  premature  deaths 
produced  by  alcohol  at  1,127,000  years,  and  th.at  there  are  constantly 
sick  or  disabled  from  its  use  98,000  persons  in  this  country. 

Assuming  the  annual  producing  power  of  an  able-bodied  person  to  be  $500 
value,  and  this  annual  loss  of  life  would  otherwise  be  producing,  the 

national  loss  is  the  immense  sum  of . . . . $612,510,000  00 

Add  to  this  the  losses  by  the  misdirected  industiy  of  those  engaged  in  the 
manufacture  and  sale  ; loss  of  one-half  the  time  of  the  600,000  drunk- 
ards and  of  the  tipplers,  as  their  number  is  estimated  by  Dr.  Har- 
greaves   568,861,592  00 

And  we  have $1,181,371,592  00 

The  grain,  etc.,  destroyed 36,000,000  00 

$1,217,371,592  oc 

Dr.  Hitchcock  estimates  the  number  of  insane,  made  so  annually,  at  9,338, 

or  less  in  effective  life  of  98,259  years,  at  $500  per  year . . 49,129,500  00 

Number  of  idiots  from  same  cause,  an  annual  loss  of  319,908  years 159,954,000  00 

$1,426,455,095.  oa 

Deduct  receipts  of  internal-revenue  tax  (year  1875) $61,225,995  53 

Receipts  from  about  500,000  State  licenses,  at  $100 50,000,000  00 

”1,225,995  53 

Annual  loss  to  the  nation  of  production  $1,315,229,096  47 

Annual  value  of  all  labor  in  the  United  States,  as  per  census  of  1870 1,263.984,003  00 

Losses  from  alcohol  in  excess  of  wages  of  labor  yearly $ 51,245,093  47 

This  calculation  includes  nothing  fcu'  interest  upon  capital  invested, 
for  care  of  the  sick,  insane,  idiotic — it  allows  alcohol  credit  for  rev- 
enue paid  on  all  which  is  used  for  legitimate  purposes.  In  England 
the  capital  invested  in  liquor  business  is  $585,000,000,  or  _;^i  17,000,000. 
It  was*provedby  the  liquor  dealers  before  the  committee  of  the  Massa- 
chusetts Legislature  in  1867  that  the  capital  invested  in  the  business 
in  Boston  was  at  least  $100,000,000,  and  in  the  whole  country  it  can 
not  be  less  than  $1,000,000,000,  or  ten  times  the  amount  invested  in 
Boston.  The  annual  value  of  imported  liquors  is  about  $80,000,000. 
It  may  be  that  the  above  estimate  of  losses  yearly  to  the  nation  is  too 
high.  Perhaps  $520  is  more  than  the  average  gross  earnings  of  an 
able-bodied  man,  and  there  may  be  other  errors  of  less  consequence. 
But  any  gentleman  is  at  liberty  to  divide  and  subdivide  the  dreadful 
aggregate  as  often  and  as  long  as  he  pleases,  and  then  I would  ask  him 
what  good  reason  has  he  to  give  why  the  nation  should  lose  a}iything 
from  these  causes. 

PAUPERISM. 

I can  not  detain  the  House  with  full  statistics  from  the  various  States 
in  regard  to  the  pauperism  occasioned  by  alcohol,  but  not  less  than 
130,000  widows  and  orphans  are  left  such  in  our  country  annually  by 
liquor-drinkers,  and  from  two-thirds  to  four-fifths  of  the  inmates  of  our 
poor-hoi'ses  are  sent  there  by  drink. 

CRIME. 

The  statistics  of  crime  are  even  more  astounding.  In  the  report  of 


20 


Manufacture  and  Sale  of 


the  United  States  Commissioner  of  Education  for  1871,  page  541,  I 
find  this  statement : “ The  fourth  fact  is,  that  from  80  to  90  per  cent, 
of  our  criminals  connect  their  courses  of  crim.e  with  intemperance. 
Of  the  14,315  inmates  of  the  Massachusetts  prisons,  12,396  are  re  - 
ported to  have  been  intemperate,  or  84  per  cent.”  Ninety-three  per 
cent,  of  those  confined  in  Deer  Island  house  of  industry-  are  confined 
for  crimes  connected  with  liquo  “ In  the  New  Hampshire  prison 
sixty-five  out  of  ninety-one  admit  themselves  to  have  been  intemperate. 
Reports  from  every  State,  county,  and  municipal  prison  in  Connecticut 
made  in  1871  show  that  more  than  90  per  cent,  had  been  in  habits  of 
drink  by  their  own  admission.”  The  warden  of  the  Rhode  Island 
State  prison  estimates  90  per  cent,  of  his  prisoners  as  drinkers. 
These  relate  to  those  who  have  been  guilty  of  the  more  serious 
offenses,  not  mere  every-day  arrests  for  drunkenness  and  disorderly 
conduct. 

The  report  of  the  Board  of  State  Charities  of  Pennsydvania  for  1871 
says,  page  89 : 

The  most  prolific  source  of  disease,  poverty,  and  crime  observing  men  will  acknowledge 
IS  intemperance. 

Mr.  William  J.  Mullen,  the  well-known  and  highly  esteemed  prison 
agent,  in  his  report  for  1870  says  : 

An  evidence  of  the  bad  effects  of  this  unholy  business  may  be  seen  in  the  fact  that  there 
have  been  thirty-four  murders  within  this  city  (Philadelphia'^  during  the  last  year  alone, 
each  one  of  which  was  traceable  to  intemferancey  and  one  hundred  and  twenty-one 
assaults  for  murder  proceeding  from  the  same  cause.  Of  over  38,000  arrests  in  our  city 
within  the  year,  75  per  cent,  were  caused  by  intemperance.  Of  18,305  persons  committed 
to  our  prison  within  the  year,  more  than  two-thirds  were  the  consequence  of 
intemperance. 

Judge  Allison,  in  a speech  delivered  in  Philadelphia  in  1872,  says: 

In  our  criminal  courts  we  can  trace  four-fifths  of  the  crimes  that  are  committed  to  the 
influence  of  rum.  There  is  not  one  case  in  twenty  where  a man  is  tried  for  bis  life  in 
which  rum  is  not  the  direct  or  indirect  cause  of  the  murder. 

And  Philadelphia  is  the  city  of  brotherly  love.  She  is  excelled  by  no 
large  city  in  the  world  in  all  the  elements  and  evidences  of  enlightened 
Christian  civilization.  She  has  immortalized  herself  in  our  centennial 
year  by  a queenly  majesty  of  municipal  deportment  and  a magnificence 
of  patriotic  hospitality  which  are  a source  of  love  and  pride  to  her 
countrymen  and  have  won  for  her  the  cordial  and  unstinted  admiration 
of  mankind.  And  it  is  a delightful  relief  for  my  aching  head,  as  I copy 
and  compile  these  statistics  of  damnation,  to  record  the  illuminating 
and  illustrative  fact  that  on  those  centennial  grounds,  from  which  in- 
toxicating liquors  were  rigidly  excluded,  and  where  the  esthetic  and 
diviner  cravings  of  humanity  were  fed  as  from  the  gardens  of  God, 
among  all  the  millions  who  wandered  through  that  world  of  the  last 
and  highest  results  of  civilization  on  earth,  not  one  arrest  was  made 
for  intoxication  during  the  whole  term  of  the  exhibition.  The  in- 
finite significance  of  that  philosophy  which  not  only  demands  prohib- 
itory laws  to  restrain  evil,  but  also  the  provision  of  food  for  the  mind 
and  stimulants  to  all  the  innocent,  enlarging,  and  ennobling  tenden- 
f;ies  of  the  soul,  could  not  be  more  strikingly  illustrated  and 
enforced. 

Mr.  Speaker,  the  records  of  New  York,  with  her  more  than  ten 
thousand  liquor  shops,  one-half  of  which  are  v/ilicensed,  and  which  Mr. 
Oliver  Dyer  says  would  line  both  sides  of  a street  running  from  the 


Intoxicating  Liquors. 


21 


Battery  out  eight  mijes  into  Westchester  county,  having  by  the  refort 
of  Superintendent  Kennedy,  made  some  years  since,  an  average  of 
one  hundred  and  thirty-four  visits  each  daily,  with  50,844  arrests  for 
intoxication  and  disorderly  conduct  in  the  single  year  1868,  and  with 
98,861  arrests  for  crimes  of  every  description,  nine-tenths  of  which 
were  the  result  of  drink ; all  these  I have  examined,  but  I have  no 
heart  to  dwell  upon  them.  1 can  not  endure  their  longer  contemplation. 
The  mathensatics  of  this  infinite  evil  are  only  paralleled  by  the  tre- 
mendous calculations  of  astronomy,  and  as  I quit  the  appalling  theme 
I feel  as  though  1 had  been  calculating  eclipses  on  the  firmament  of 
the  pit. 

If  we  can  do  no  more  for  this  agonized  land,  groaning  and  travail- 
ing in  despair,  than  to  institute  the  commission  of  inquiry  into  the 
statistical  evidences  which  are  waiting  everywhere  for  proper  authen- 
tication, and  a bill  for  which,  having  passed  the  Senate,  reposes  in 
the  embrace  of  a committee  of  this  House,  we  shall  have  accomplished 
something  for  which  the  ages  to  come  will  rise  up  to  bless  our  memory ; 
for  I sincerely  believe  that  nothing  is  required  to  work  out  our  salva- 
tion from  the  great  evil  which  we  are  considering  but  authentic 
knowledge,  generally  diffused  among  the  people.  In  the  pressure 
of  the  momentous  affairs  by  which  we  are  surrounded,  I have  not  been 
able  to  summarize  and  classiiy  as  I would  otherwise  have  done  this 
statement  of  such  facts  as  appear  to  me  to  be  derived  from  reliable 
sources  ; but  I have  done  the  best  I could,  hoping  that  abler  minds 
will  turn  their  attention  to  the  subject,  and  that  Congress  will  no  longer 
neglect  to  institute  official  inquiries,  with  a view  to  such  ultimate 
legal  action  as  may  arrest  an  evil  which,  if  not  arrested,  will  go  far  to 
destroy  the  American  people. 

BEARING  OF  THE  SUBJECT  UPON  THE  EDUCATION  OF  THE 
PEOPLE. 

Some  paper  has  sneeringly  alluded  to  this  proposed  amendment  as 
a measure  of  temperance  reform  for  posterity.  Chiefly  so  it  is  ; and! 
all  the  voices  of  humanity  cry  out  for  its  adoption.  All  thinking  men 
admit  that  the  condition  of  posterity  depends  upon  inteliigence  and 
virtue,  and  these  are  transmitted  and  developed  by  the  educational 
institutions  and  processes  of  the  country,  of  which  by  far  the  most 
important  is  the  common  school ; and  over  that  alone  has  the 
Government  any  control.  Contrast  for  a moment  tl'.e  means  of  edu- 
cation in  virtue  and  intelligence  with  those  which  exist  for  the  promo- 
tion of  vice  and  crime  and  misery  in  this  country,  and  then  let  those 
sneer  who  will  at  a measure  which  aims  to  save  posterity  from  the  fate 
which,  if  there  is  no  reform,  will  overtake  us  in  national  life,  just  as 
surely  as  the  time  finally  comes  when  the  individual  inebriate,  whether 
in  the  horrors  of  delirium  or  the  stupidity  of  the  consumed  sot,  drops 
into  the  tomb  of  despair. 

The  census  of  1870  shows  that  there  are  in  the  United  States 
141,629  schools,  with  221,042  teachers,  and  7,209,938  pupils  who 
attend  in  the  aggregate — the  average  is  less — costing  $95,402,826.  Of 
these,  125,059  are  public  schools,  with  183,198  teachers,  6,228,060 
pupils,  costing  $64,030,673  yearly. 

There  are  12,955,443  between  the  ages  of  five  and  eighteen  years 


22 


Manufacture  and  Sale  of 


who  should  be  at  school,  leaving  4,845,505  who  do  not  atlenil  at  all 
Ajout  740,000  of  these  are  engaged  in  labor  of  some  kind  ; Ixit  there 
must  be  more  than  3,000,000, who  do  not  go  to  school  at  all.  Dr 
Hargreaves  says  that  ninety-n'ine  hundreths  of  them  are:  children  of 
the  intemperate,  and  he  makes  the  following  tabular  statement,  show- 
ing the  relative  efficiency  of  the  “two  educational  systems  ” as  they 
are  operated  in  Pennsylvania,  whose  condition  is  not  discreditable  in 
comparison  with  the  country  at  large  : 


EDUCATION  IN  KNOWLEDGE  AND  VIRTUE. 


EDUCATION  IN  IMMORALITY  AND  VICE. 


Schools,  colleges,  etc.,  in  Penn- 
sylvania  

Professors  and  teachers 

Pupils  and  students,  etc.  in  reg- 
ular attendance 

Cost  for  educational  purpo*>es  in 
Pennsylvania 


16,090 

18,7^3 

542,076 

$8, 399-723 


Drinking-places  in  Pennsylvania  23,606 

Persons  employed  in  liquor 

shops 45^490 

Tipplers  and  drunkards 8<^,6o4 

Direct  cost  of  liquors  in  Penn- 
sylvania  $80,000,000 


More  than  nine  times  as  much  money  spent  to  destroy  as  there  is 
to  save  “ posterity  ” by  these  two  systems.  And  again  he  says  : 

Though  within  the  last  twenty  years  our  teachers  have  increased  from  25  to  30  per 
cent,  and  pupils  attending  school  more  than  50  per  cent.,  yet  crime  has  increased  more 
than  60  per  cent. 


Rather  a hard  look  for  “ posterity ; ” and  if  there  is  no  change, 
“posterity  ” better  not  be  there. 


RIGHT  AND  NECESSITY  OF  LEGISLATION. 

The  right  of  Government  to  legislate  upon  the  subject  of  intem- 
perance has  been  strongly  denied,  but  the  absolute  necessity  of  pro- 
hibition or  regulation  of  the  traffic  in  intoxicating  drinks  has  been 
demonstrated  in  every  civilized  country  where  their  use  has  unfortu- 
nately become  prevalent,  and  the  statute-books  of  England  and 
America,  for  two  centuries  at  least,  bear  constant  witness  to  the  exer- 
cise of  that  power.  The  question  has  been  raised  and  settled  in  the 
Supreme  Court  of  the  United  States  and  by  the  highest  tribunals  in 
almost  every  State  of  the  Union,  if  not  in  all.  It  is  too  late  to  deny 
the  power,  the  right,  and  the  necessity  of  such  legislation.  It  is  only 
a question  of  the  jurisdiction  by  which  it  shall  be  enacted  and  the  ex- 
tent to  which  it  shall  be  carried. 

In  this  connection  I wish  to  call  attention  to  a fallacy  which  exists 
in  the  minds  of  many.  It  is  assumed  by  the  advocates  in  the  traffic 
of  intoxicating  liquors  that  there  is  a distinction  between  the  right 
of  Government  to  enact  legislation  totally  and  parlially  prohibitory. 
Government,  it  is  said,  may  license  and  regulate,  but  xx\2y  wot  prohibit. 
But  there  is  no  such  distinction  in  reason  at  all.  The  power  to  par~ 
tiatty  prohibit  by  license — which  is  prohibition  so  far  as  it  restricts  at 
all — is  the  same  power  and  stands  upon  the  same  ground  ; that  is,  the 
obligation  to  promote  the  general  welfare — as  that  to  prohibit  abso- 
lutely. A license  to  one  man  to  make  or  sell  ardent  spirits  is  an  abso- 
lute prohibition  to  all  the  rest  of  the  community  to  do  so  ai  all.  The 
advocates  of  the  license  and  regulation  of  the  traffic  have  no  logical 
grounds  upon  which  to  object  to  absolute  prohibition,  if  necessity  re- 
quires. It  is  only  a question  of  degree.  The  universal  sense  of  man- 
kind has  passed  that  point  where  it  is  necessaiy  to  demonstrate  the 
right  to  prohibit  absolutely  and  totally.  There  is  in  fact  no  lifference 
between  license  and  prohibition  as  a principle.  ProhibitiGL  is  neve* 


intoxicating  Liquors. 


23 


helJ  to  extern?  beyond  those  uses  which  are  demonstrably  injurious 
to  society.  For  all  necessary  and  beneficial  purposes  prohibitory  laws 
permit  or  license  the  traffic.  I think  this  view  of  the  subject  important 
and  a complete  reply  to  those  who  claim  that  the  evil  should  be 
licensed  and  regfulated,  at  the  same  time  that  they  hold  the  total  pro- 
hibition to  be  a violation  of  inalienable  right  and  the  enactment  of  a 
sumptuaiy  law.  The  one  is  as  much  a sumptuary  law  and  a violatioi 
of  inalienable  right  as  the  other,  and  no  more  so.  If  this  is  true,  and 
I am  not  able  to  see  wherein  it  is  false,  there  is  an  end  of  the  argument 
between  the  advocates  of  license  and  prohibition  as  to  the  right  of 
such  legislation,  for  they  stand  upon  common  ground,  and  there  is  31c 
logical  position  for  those  who  controvert  the  justice  of  prohibitory  laws, 
so  called,  but  that  of  those  who  advocate  the  unrestricted  right  to 
manufacture  and  sell  intoxicating  liquors  to  evert'body  for  ail  purposes ; 
and  that  ground  has  not  been  held  by  any  court  for  generations  to  my 
knowledge. 

Alcohol  has  its  uses.  It  is  a necessity  in  the  arts.  It  is  invaluable 
for  many  medicinal  purposes,  and  as  such  is  entitled  to  protection  as 
property.  But  on  the  other  hand  it  is  armed  with  fatal  capacity  to 
destroy.  It  is  a Pandora’s  box  of  evils.  In  its  peculiarly  fata!  form, 
that  of  distillation,  which  is  a concentrated  death,  it  was  unknown 
for  fifty-five  hundred  years  of  the  world’s  history,  and  mankind  were 
the  better  for  their  ignorance.  The  fruit  of  this  tree  of  knowledge 
has  been  death.  During  the  last  three  centuries  what  is  known  as 
ardent  spirits  with  us,  and  the  immense  and  dreadful  curses  which 
grow  out  of  their  use,  have  gradually  arisen.  They  have  the  power 
of  perverting  the  natural  instincts  and  tastes  of  both  body  and  mind, 
and  to  recreate  man  into  the  slave  of  perverted  appetites,  having  in- 
satiable, consuming,  uncontrollable,  devilish  power.  The  image  of  God 
becomes  dangerous  to  society  as  well  as  to  himself,  whether  as  a ma- 
niac or  as  a criminal,  and  it  is  this  consequettce  of  the  use  of  intoxi- 
cating liquors  which  the  laws  have  constantly,  but  imperfectly,  under- 
taken to  control  for  many  years  ; nothing  more. 

This  amendment  proposes  to  extend  over  the  national  domain  the 
protection  of  a constitutional  inhibition  of  the  destructive  tendencies 
of  liquors  when  made  and  used  for  purposes  which  have  been  proved 
to  be  detrimental  to  society,  and  which  many  of  the  States  of  the 
Union  have  endeavored  vainly  to  restrict  and  destroy. 

Nothing  but  a general  law  can  be  efficient.  That  has  been  demon- 
strated by  experience.  While  one  State  prohibits,  another  manufac- 
tures and  encourages.  The  appetite  already  exists.  It  increases  and 
even  becomes  hereditary.  More  than  one  hundred  and  sixty  thou- 
sand saloons  and  tippling-places  educate  the  children  of  America  in 
habits  of  intoxication,  and  the  appetite  will  crush  the  imaginary  lines 
which  State  legislation  erects  against  the  introduction  of  this  evil  mer- 
chandise, even  as  the  billows  of  the  lake  which  bumeth  with  fire  and 
brimstone  might  be  supposed  to  bury  and  consume  the  paper  on  which 
that  legislation  is  written.  The  manufacture  and  the  apj>etite  act 
and  react  upon  each  other.  The  demand  creates  the  supply,  and  con- 
stantly cries  out,  “Give  ! Give  1 ” The  supply  or  manufacture  is  thus 
stimulated  and  perpetuated.  It  will  always  continue  unless  stopped 
oy  the  union  of  persuasion  and  compulsion,  because  of  its  lucrative 


24 


Manufacture  and  Sale  of 


nature,  and  because  the  appetite  for  strong-  drink  when  once  cstab* 
lished  lives  with  an  infernal  immortality  through  successive  genera* 
tions  of  men.  Thus  it  is  that  the  necessity  of  legal  enactment  is 
apparent.  True,  that  behind  legal  enactments,  as  in  all  other  cases 
where  public  evils  and  crimes  are  prohibited  by  law.  must  be  public 
opinion,  which  is  the  basis  of  all  law  in  a free  country  where  the 
people  rule,  and  public  opinion  is  the  creature  of  experience,  argu- 
ment, discussion,  and  personal  appeal — in  short,  of  “moral  suasion,” 
as  these  agencies  are  called  in  their  application  to  the  subject  of  in- 
temperate vice  in  the  use  of  spirituous  liquors.  “ Moral  suasion  ” 
must  precede  the  law,  and  accompany  and  assist  in  its  enforcement 
They  are  allies.  The  one  grows  out  of  the  other  just  as  the  law  against 
theft  grows  out  of  the  universal  sentiment  of  mankind  that  theft  is 
wrong  and  a public  evil  which  must  be  prevented  by  the  forces  oi 
society. 

Laws  to  protect  society  against  intoxication  inevitably  grow  out  of 
moral  suasion,  if  there  is  enough  of  it  to  arouse  the  general  conscience 
and  the  intelligent  apprehension  of  the  people  to  the  enormous  losses 
and  wrongs  inflicted  by  alcohol  upon  society  at  large.  Thus  it  is  that 
the  call  for  more  of  moral  suasion  and  less  of  law  is  a contradiction  of 
terms.  These  forces  are  in  harmony  like  a father  and  son  in  a part- 
nership ; the  law  steps  in  and  enlarges  and  perpetuates  the  business 
which  moral  suasion  has  established  after  years  of  indefatigable  in- 
dustry upon  the  platform,  through  the  press,  and  by  private  solicita- 
tion and  appeal.  And  for  any  person  to  cry  out  against  a law  agains . 
the  use  of  intoxicating  liquors  in  society  which  can  never  have  beer 
enacted  at  all  but  in  consequence  of  moral  suasion,  and  say  that  it 
injures  the  cause  because  you  can  not  compel  men  to  do  right  against 
their  will,  is  to  say  that  all  crime  and  every  public  evil  shall  go  free 
of  the  law;  not  only  that,  but  that  society  shall  abandon  all  con- 
servative and  preventive  means  for  the  protection  of  those  who 
come  after  us  ; that  not  only  shall  the  law  abandon  the  present,  but 
the  rising  generation,  and,  in  fact,  consistency  will  require  that  in  the 
end  moral  suasion  itself  must  be  abandoned,  since  its  inevitable  result 
is  a formal  embodiment  of  its  teachings  in  general  law,  as  soon  as  it 
has  produced  a strong  public  sentiment  upon  which  law  can  rest— 
and  which  will  enforce  the  law. 

I have  already  asked  attention  to  the  facts  which  as  I think  dem- 
onstrate that  the  unrestricted  use  and  -effect  of  distilled  spirits  con- 
stitute public  evils  of  such  a nature  as  to  not  only  justify,  but  compel 
tfie  interposition  of  the  law;  just  now  I wish  to  confine  attention  ta 
the  necessity  of 

NATIONAL  LEGISL.4TION 

if  we  would  reach  the  evil  effectively. 

It  is  evident,  in  the  first  place,  that  the  intense  thirst  or  appetit':  of 
the  country  will  lead  to  the  manufacture  and  transportation  of  alco- 
hol for  the  purpose  of  its  gratification.  If  the  production  is  sup- 
pre.ssed  everywhere  else  in  the  whole  country,  still  in  a single  one  of 
the  smallest  States  where  the  manufacture  might  be  allowed  (and  the 
temptation  to  permit  the  manufacture  in  small  and  isolated  localities 
would  be  greatly  increased  in  the  proportion  that  the  concentration  erf 


Intoxicating  Liquors. 


25 


he  business  made  its  existence  profitable  to  the  State  for  purposes  of 
taxation  and  otherwise),  the  materials  being  transported,  as  they  would 
be,  from  other  States,  the  entire  supply  of  all  kinds  of  distilled  spirits 
for  the  whole  countr)'  could  easily  be  furnished.  The  manufacture 
might  be  localized,  but  it  would  still  exist,  and  all  the  efforts  of  State 
legislation  elsewhere  w’ould  thus  be  substantially  thwarted. 

Again,  supposing  that  every  State  and  Territory  in  the  country 
should  suppress  the  manufacture,  and  importation  from  abroad  should 
continue,  the  evil  would  remain  the  same ; and  we  should  only  have 
transferred  the  manufacture,  with  the  immense  capital  engaged  in  it, 
to  a foreign  country  to  which  we  should  first  export  our  corn,  and 
rye,  and  wheat  to  be  returned  in  the  form  of  imported  liquors  to  the 
dry  throats  of  American  consumers.  Thus  we  should  retain  the  evil 
after  depriving  ourselves  of  the  revenues  derived  from  it.  Now,  since 
State  legislation  can  not  interfere  with  the  manufacture  outside  its 
own  limits,  nor  perhaps  within  its  own  limits  for  exportation  to  other 
States,  and  as  commerce,  alike  domestic  and  foreign,  is  controlled  by 
the  General  Government,  it  is  apparent  that  any  legal  enactment 
which  goes  to  the  root  of  the  matter  must  be  national  in  its  scope 
and  character.  So  far  as  the  exportation  to  other  countries  is  con- 
cerned, while  I do  not  say  that  it  could  not  be  still  carried  on  with- 
out great  evil  to  our  own  pTople,  aside  from  the  waste  of  material 
and  the  perversion  of  capital  and  labor  from  useful  purposes,  yet  to 
continue  to  poison  mankind  at  large  with  what  we  had  prohibited  to 
ourselves  would  be  like  peddling  off  to  our  neighbors  the  contam- 
inated and  fatal  garments  which  we  might  have  had  left  after  the 
small-pox  or  yellow  fever  had  run  through  our  own  family. 

As  a means  of  suppression,  the  power  to  arrest  the  article  i)i  transitu 
is  hardly  less  important  than  that  to  prevent  the  manufacture  and 
sale  ; but  this  nower  can  never  be  effectively  exercised  so  long  as  the 
United  States  protects  the  transportation  of  ardent  spirits  to  the  same 
extent  as  other  forms  of  property  from  one  part  of  the  country  to  an- 
other. Experience  has  demonstrated  the  impossibility  of  prevention 
when  there  is  a chance  to  procure  and  while  all  the  innumerable 
avenues  of  transportation  are  open. 

Again,  the  power  to  control  the  manufacture  and  sale  and  u.se  of 
distilled  alcoholic  liquors  is  to  be  found  under  the  head  of  the  f>alice 
power  of  government,  as  it  is  called,  which  is  vested  primarily  in  the 
several  States ; and  in  order  that  this  power  be  exercised  by  the  na- 
tion at  large,  except  in  the  District  of  Columbia  and  the  Terri) ones, 
the  Constitution  must  first  be  amended  so  as  to  give  the  na  ional 
Government  the  right  to  co-operate  with  the  States  in  the  enforcement 
of  that  power  for  the  restriction  of  this  traffic.  There  is  no  valid  ob- 
jection to  the  enlargement  or  change  of  national  jurisdiction  in  this 
respect,  as  will  appear  Dom  an  inspection  of  the  Constitution  as  it  now 
stands.  The  power  already  exists  over  the  internal  police  of  the  .States 
so  Jar  as  to  protect  alcohol  as  property  for  all  purposes  for  wh'ch  it 
can  be  manufactured  and  transported.  The  Constitution  now  inter- 
feres with  the  internal  police  of  every  State  which  may  desire  te  ban- 
ish liquor  from  its  borders  for  the  public  good,  by  protecting  every 
other  State  which  sees  fit  to  encourage  the  traffic  in  the  production 
and  transportation  of  this  substance  as  a commodity  of  legitimate 


26 


Manufacture  and  Sale  of 


commerce,  and  compels  each  State  to  allow  its  importation  in  )ullj 
from  foreign  countries  and  other  States,  and  when  once  within  the  ter- 
ritorial limits  of  a State,  you  can  no  more  prevent  its  distribution 
throug'h  the  dram-shop  than  you  can  arrest  the  progress  of  the  storm 
by  a geographical  line.  So  it  is  that  the  Constitution  already  does 
interfere  in  the  most  potent  and  specific  manner  with  the  internal 
police  of  the  States  upon  this  all-important  subject. 

Thus  it  appears,  yfrj-A  that  the  evil  can  only  be  effectually  reached 
by  national  legislation,  and,  second,  that  such  legislation  must  be  of 
1 ccnstitutio7ial  character.  It  further  appears  that  this  is  the  assertion 
of  no  new  power  over  the  internal  police  of  the  States.  It  is  only  a 
modification  for  the  general  welfare  of  a power  already  possessed  bj 
the  national  Government,  which  is  now  being  exercised  to  the  de- 
struction of  the  efforts  of  the  States  to  extirpate  a prolific  source  ot 
pauperism,  crime,  and  death.  The  Constitution  of  the  United  States, 
as  it  now  is  and  has  been  from  the  beginning,  is  a law  for  the  unre- 
stricted manufacture,  sale,  importation,  exportation,  and  internal  trans- 
portation of  intoxicating  liquors.  It  is  the  great  legal  fortress  of  intem- 
perance in  this  country  to-day.  It  is  not  a blank  upon  this  subject.  It  is 
not  even  a mere  license  law.  But  by  its  recognition  of  alcohol  as  prop- 
erty, which  may  be  made  and  used  and  carried  and  protected  for  all 
purposes  in  the  national  domain  ; by  its  protection  of  alcohol  as  an  Im- 
ported article  in  the  ports  and  in  the  Territories  of  the  nation,  and 
by  its  practical  nullification  of  State  laws,  enabling  the  citizens  of  one 
State  to  erect  a public  bar  protected  by  the  supreme  law  of  the  land 
along  every  inch  of  the  boundaries  of  a sister  State  which  may  be 
struggling  to  suppress  the  evil,  by  smuggling  strong  liquors  with  im- 
punity across  the  boundaries  of  States,  and  even  carrying  them 
everywhere  under  the  Stars  and  Stripes,  protected  if  need  be  by  the 
Army  of  the  Union,  in  these  ways  the  Constitution  of  the  United 
States  is  now  the  great  almighty  obstacle  in  the  way'  of  the  temper- 
ance reform  in  this  country. 

THAT  CONSTITUTION  OUGHT  IN  THIS  RESPECT  TO  BE  CHANGED. 

Can  it  be  changed  ? That  is  the  question,  and  there  is  but  one  an- 
swer. It  viust  be  done.  No  such  word  as  fail  should  be  allowed  in 
the  vocabulary  of  patriotism.  But  how?  It  can  only  be  done  by  pub- 
lic opinion.  Intelligence,  conscience,  and  common  sense  are  the  founda- 
tions of  sound  public  opinion  ; and  they'  are  the  agencies  which  must 
be  relied  upon  to  effect  the  proposed  change  in  the  Constitution  of  the 
nation.  It  must  be  based  upon  the  intelligent  demand  of  three- 
fourths  of  the  States  in  this  Union.  How  can  that  public  sentiment 
be  created  ? First,  there  must  be  an  intelligent  apprehension  of  the 
extent  of  the  evil  to  be  remedied,  and  that  the  nation  as  such  is  con 
cemed  in  it.  Second,  there  must  be  a practical  measure  proposed, 
wise  and  just  and  efficient,  upon  which  the  efforts  of  the  people  can 
be  concentrated.  That  measure  must  be  radical  in  its  nature,  but  it 
must  not  ignore  existing  rights  nor  violate  the  public  faith,  nor  assail 
the  personal  character  of  those  who  are  engaged  in  what  the  nation 
recognizes,  and  has  recognized  from  the  beginning,  as  a legitimate 
business  and  source  of  revenue  to  the  coffers  of  the  country.  If  the 
nation  has  traded  in  its  own  destruction  it  must  itself  wear  the  hood 


Intoxicating  Liquors. 


2; 


of  shame.  That  measure  can  not  destroy  property  rights  vested  in 
the  public  faith  without  compensation  or  without  giving  ample  tim« 
for  the  diversion  of  capital  to  other  and  less  pernicious  industries. 

THE  SLAVE  TRADE 

tvas  abolislied  by  a constitutional  provision,  which,  in  form,  gave  it 
protection  for  nearly  twenty  years.  If  it  had  been  proposed  to  make 
that  provision  operative  at  once,  the  Constitution  itself  never  would 
have  been  adopted  by  the  American  people.  That  measure  must  in- 
terfere as  little  as  possible  with  the  internal  affairs  ol  the  States, 
leaving  to  them  the  enforcement  of  special  laws  within  their  own  bor- 
ders subject  to  the  general  constitutional  restriction.  And,  finally, 
in  order  to  have  practical  value,  it  piust  be  one  which,  appealing  to 
the  intelligence  and  patriotism  of  all  classes  in  the  whole  country, 
will  have  some  rational  chance  of  adoption  by  the  widely  diversified 
interests,  prejudices,  and  sentiments  of  this  vast  nation,  and  of  in- 
corporation into  the  supreme  law  of  the  land.  Such  a measure  I have 
endeavored  to  devise,  and,  although  it  may  be  full  of  imperfections,  I 
have  felt  some  hope  that  it  wouid  turn  the  attention  of  greater  powers 
to  the  subject,  and  that  the  eminent  gentlemen  who  have  charge  of  it 
would  mature  some  plan  for  the  suppression  of  this  national  crime  and 
shame,  through  a constitutional  inhibition.  I desire  to  call  specific 
attention  to  tiiose  features  of  this  proposed  amendment  to  the  Con- 
stitution which  have  commended  themselves  to  my  own  judgment, 
and  which  I have  thought  would  strike  the  public  mind  with  some 
force. 

LEADING  FEATURES  OF  THE  PROPOSED  AMENDMENT. 

First,  it  is  a proposed  constitutional  amendment,  and  not  a measure 
of  proposed  legislation  by  Congress  under  the  Constitution  as  it  now  is, 
I think  I have  already  said  enough  to  show  that  whatever  the  nation 
does  to  facilitate  the  suppression  of  the  evils  perpetrated  by  alcohol 
must  be  accomplished  by  a change  in  the  Constitution  itself. 

TIME. 

Second,  the  time  when  the  first  clause  shall  take  effect  is  so  far  in 
the  future  that  vested  rights  will  not  suffer  at  all  ; certainly  not  es- 
sentially. Notice  of  a quarter  of  a century  is  sufficient  to  every  man- 
ufacturer to  turn  his  attention  to  other  and  less  harmful  pursuits. 
It  is  longer  than  our  fathers  gave  to  the  merchant  marine  of  the 
country  to  remove  its  capital  from  the  slave  trade,  even  if  ratified  at 
once,  and  ten  years  are  given  whenever  ratification  may  take  place. 
This  will  enable  every  man  to  wear  out  his  still  or  convert  his  ma- 
chinery to  some  beneficial  purpose.  It  will  cover  the  average  period 
of  business  life  for  this  entire  generation,  and  I doubt  whether  there 
is  a distiller  in  the  world  who  desires  that  his  son  should  follow  the 
pursuit  in  which  he  himself  feels  compelled  to  remain,  and  the  imme- 
diate destruction  of  which  would  reduce  his  family  to  beggary.  Capi- 
tal invested  in  the  wholesale  and  import  trade  could  be  very  easily 
diverted  in  other  directions  at  much  shorter  notice,  while  the  retailer 
only  requires  time  to  sell  out  his  stock  on  hand. 

I am  persuaded  that  great  injustice  is  often  done  in  public  discus- 
iions  of  this  subject  by  the  wholesale  denunciations  and  uncharitable, 


28 


Manufacture  and  Sale  of 


not  to  say  unchristian  and  even  brutal,  epithets  which  aie  hurled  a1 
the  large  number  of  American  citizens  who  are  engaged  in  one  branch 
or  another  of  the  liquor  business.  They  are  men  like  ourselves,  often- 
times better  than  those  who  assail  them,  and  nothing  is  gained  by  the 
effort  to  reform  individuals  by  lectures  which  would  disgrace  a "fish- 
•.voman,  or  to  carry  great  public  measures  by  scurrilous  attacks  upon 
men  who  follow  an  avocation  which,  however  hostile  to  the  interests 
of  mankind,  is  yet  intrenched  in  the  Constitution  of  our  country— a 
Constitution  sanctioned  by  the  names  of  Washington,  Franklin,  and 
Madison,  and  by  virtue  of  the  broad  provisions  of  which  we  derive 
the  power  to  attack  our  fellow-men  with  a license  of  the  tongue  al- 
most as  pernicious  to  the  public  welfare  as  th€  license  of  the  traffic 
in  rum.  I am  satisfied  that  very  large  numbers  of  men  whose  inter- 
ests are  bound  up  in  the  liquor  tratfic  would  themselves  gladly  co- 
operate, if  they  were  not  repelled  as  criminals,  with  the  most  ultra 
advocates  of  the  temperance  cause  in  some  broad  measure  which, 
while  it  will  enable  them  to  avoid  pecuniary  ruin,  will,  at  the  same 
time,  protect  the  coming  generations  from  the  storm  of  fire  and  brim- 
stone which  is  pelting  ours  like  that  which  fell  upon  Sodom  and  Go- 
morrah and  left  them  at  the  bottom  of  the  Dead  Sea. 

THE  CONSUMER. 

Again,  the  consumer,  he  who  complains  that  you  assault  his  man- 
hood, his  personal  liberty:  that  you  lock  up  his  mouth  with  a sump- 
tuaiy  law ; that  you  trample  upon  his  God-given  freedom,  when  you 
deprive  him  of  his  rum,  whisky,  brandy,  and  gin  ; when  you  interfere 
with  his  right  to  get  drunk,  to  be  drunk,  and  to  help  others  to  be 
drunk  like  himself,  even  this  man  can  not  complain,  for  before  the 
year  1900  he  will  be  in  his  grave.  And  I have  never  yet  seen  the  soi 
even  who  wanted  to  transmit  his  right  to  be  destroyed  by  strong  drink 
to  his  son.  There  is  hardly  a victim  of  intemperance  on  this  conti- 
nent to-day  who  will  not  vote  to  save  his  son  from  the  dreadful  ap)- 
petite  which  chains  him  to  his  fate.  The  parental  sentiment  of  the 
country  will  cry  out  for  this  amendment,  and  the  instincts  of  human 
nature  will  crowd  to  the  ballot-bo:ies  of  the  land  to  save  the  children 
of  the  ages  to  come.  I firmly  believe  that  if  Congress  will  only  give 
the  American  people  the  opportunity  to  act  on  this  proposed  amend- 
ment, it  would  win,  upon  a popular  vote,  after  two  years’  discussion. 

But  there  is  no  form  in  w'hich  the  appeal  can  be  made  but  by  the 
submission  of  an  amenelment  from  the  National  Legislature  to  the 
States  at  large,  and  why  should  not  the  opportunity  be  given  and  the 
lestilt  left  with  the  people  themselv'es  ? 

The  importation  of  liquors  is  now  the  subject  of  treaty  stipulation 
with  France  and  other  countries,  but  w'e  have  the  unquestionable 
right  to  abrogate  these  treaties  after  reasonable  notice.  Eveiy  nation 
has  this  right,  and  I allude  to  it  only  because  I have  heard  the  exist- 
ence of  these  treaties  suggested  as  an  obstacle  to  the  adoption  of  the 
amendment. 

Again,  this  resolution  proposes  to  prevent  the 

M.\NUFACTURE. 

I think  it  is  apparer.c  that  there  can  be  no  permanent  tempe*ance 
form  in  this  country  so  long  as  the  manufacture  is  free. 


Intoxicating  Liquors. 


29 


I am  not  aware  of  the  existence  of  any  law  in  any  State  which  in- 
terferes with  the  unrestricted  manufacture  of  distilled  spirits  for  every 
purpose.  Whatever  is  made  will  be  sold  ; and  if  it  is  right  to  regulate 
or  prohibit  the  sale  for  any  use,  it  must  be  right  to  regulate  or  prohibit 
the  manufacuure  for  the  same  use ; and  if  it  is  possible  to  regulate  or 
prevent  the  sale  after  the  article  has  been  distributed  into  a million 
localities  all  over  the  country,  it  is  comparatively  easy  to  control  the 
manufacture,  which  necessarily  must  be  carried  on  where  large  masses 
of  capital  are  concentrated.  Granted  that  individuals  will  manufac- 
ture their  own  poison,  yet  they  must  do  it  in  secret  and  under  such  dif- 
ficulties and  public  reprobation  that  comparatively  small  injury  could 
result.  And  if  it  is  possible  to  regulate  the  sale,  and  successfully  or 
even  with  approximate  success  to  restrict  the  sale  to  legitimate  and 
necessary  uses  in  detached  States,  as  has  been  so  largdy  done  even 
under  all  the  embarrassments  of  existing  laws  and  a public  sentiment 
none  too  sensitive,  and  never  hei'eafter  to  be  less  so  than  now,  how 
much  easier  will  it  be  to  regulate  and  control  the  ma7t2if actiire  by 
licenses  from  the  States  or  from  the  General  Government,  as  should 
be  found  best  in  practice.  Especially  would  this  be  so  when  by  the 
control  of  transportation  every  particle  made  could  be  traced  to  the 
proper  and  authorized  dealers  or  custodians  throughout  the  country. 
It  would  be  impossible  to  conceal  the  manufacture  if  carried  on  to  any 
injurious  extent.  Nothing  can  reach  the  manufacturer  but  a consti- 
tutional amendment,  for  two  reasons ; first,  as  before  observed,  the 
Constitution  now  recognizes  ardent  spirits,  for  all  uses,  to  be  property; 
and,  second,  no  matter  how  strictly  any  State  law  might  provide  for 
its  suppression,  capital  could  locate  in  some  other  jurisdiction,  in  some 
other  State  or  Territory,  or  in  some  foreign  State,  and  create  the  sup- 
ply which  the  drinking  appetite  of  the  consumer  demands. 

Again  it  will  be  observed  that  the  proposed  prohibition  by  the 
nation 

EXTENDS  ONLY  TO  DISTILLED 

alcoholic  liquors.  The  advocates  of  temperance  are  themselves  yet 
somewhat  divided  upon  the  question  whether  the  use  of  fermented  and 
brewed  liquors  as  a beverage  is  or  is  not  beneficial  to  the  country. 
I have  before  alluded  to  the  fact  that  there  is  high  medical  authority 
for  the  position  that  domestic  wines,  cider,  ale,  and  beer  are  not  hurt- 
ful in  themselves,  when  not  used  in  po  itive  excess,  and  rendered  so 
in  the  same  way  that  the  system  is  injured  by  gormandizing  and 
gluttony.  There  is  also  a strong  impression,  however  groundless  it 
may  be,  that  a mild  stimulant  is  essential  to  the  civilization  of  the 
nineteenth  century,  and  that  its  use  in  the  milder  forms  named  pre- 
vents more  general  indulgence  in  distilled  liquors,  with  their  terribly 
destructive  powers.  Such  a belief  is  a fact,  although  the  ground  for 
it  may  be  false. 

But  all  men  who  believe  in  restrictive  legislation  of  any  kind  concur 
in  the  assertion  that  the  use  of  distilled  alcoholic  drinks  is  the  source 
of  the  great  mass  of  the  evil  which  intemperance  inflicts  upon  the 
country,  and  all  classes  of  men  who  advocate  legislation  of  any  kind 
will,  it  is  believed,  support  this  proposition  ; some  because  they  be- 
lieve it  goes  just  far  enough,  others  because  they  believe  it  is  better 


Manufacture  and  Sale  of 


30 

than  nothing,  and  will  lead  ultimately  to  the  desired  end.  The  lattei 
class  may  well  ask  themselves  the  question : “ If  we  prevent  the 
country  from  tak  ng  the  first  step,  how  can  we  expect  it  ever  to 
take  two ” 

No  doubt  the  extinction  of  distilled  liquors  as  a beverage  will  in- 
crease, at  least  for  the  time  being,  the  consumption  of  brewed  and 
fermented  drinks  , but,  on  the  other  hand,  it  should  be  remembered 
that  the  general  improvement  of  public  sentiment,  which  must  attend 
the  long  and  earnest  agitation  of  the  subject  before  even  this  proposi- 
tion will  become  a part  of  the  law  of  the  land,  will  strengthen  the 
hands  of  those  who  oppose  the  intemperate  use  of  the  milder  intox- 
icating beverages. 

The  third  section  relates  to  the  first,  and  is  designed  to  keep  this 
proposition 

FOREVER  BEFORE  THE  COUNTRY, 

BO  long  as  there  is  a foe  to  alcohol  in  it,  and  to  save  every  advantage 
ever  gained  until  ratification  is  an  accomplished  fact.  It  can  not  be 
expected  that  this  great  work  will  be  accomplished  in  one  year,  or 
five;  but  if,  in  1890,  the  amendment  is  not  ratified,  then  it  is  to  ga 
into  effect  ten  years  after  its  ratification,  whenever  that  devoutly-to-be- 
wished  consummation  is  realized.  Ever}^  position  gained  will  be  held. 
Whatever  question  might  arise  from  lapse  of  time  as  to  the  continued 
pendency  of  the  proposition  before  the  American  people,  or  as  to  the 
powei  which  has  been  claimed  of  a State  to  withdraw  its  assent  to  an 
amendment  at  any  time  before  ratification  by  the  constitutional  three- 
fourths  of  the  States,  is  entirely  obviated  by  the  distinct  profusion  of 
the  pending  proposition  itself. 

If  this  Congress,  or  if  any  subsequent  Congress,  will  submit  this 
proposed  amendment  to  the  people  of  the  country  for  action,  there 
will  never  be  necessity  for  another  plan  of  battle.  Whenever  this  one 
is  carried  out,  the  victor}'  will  be  complete.  There  can  be  no  such 
thing  as  repulse,  as  the  loss  of  strategic  points,  or  of  defeat,  just  as 
victory  begins  to  dawn. 

The  language  employed  in  stating  the 

EXCEPTED  PURPOSES  AND  USES 

for  which  the  manufacture  and  traffic  would  still  legally  exist  is,  1 
think,  as  broad  and  comprehensive  as  any  which  can  be  de\ised,  and 
at  the  same  time  secure  the  object  of  the  amendment.  The  term  arts 
includes  cooking  and  all  the  common,  useful,  industrial,  and  presen- 
ative  purposes  which  are  known  and  practiced  by  the  people,  as  well 
as  the  fine  arts  and  the  more  intricate  and  recondite  processes  of  the 
laboratory.  The  term  fjiedicinal  must  cover  every  occasion  for  the 
use  of  alcchol  as  a remedy  for  physical  infirmity,  whether  of  man  or 
beast,  and  I think  the  statement  of  specific  excepted  uses  and  purposes 
for  which  production  and  traffic  may  be  continued  better  ihan  the 
mere  prohibition  thereof  for  use  as  a “ bez’erage.”  The  medicinal  use 
is  necessarily  sometimes  as  a beverage,  although  the  proper  use  as  a 
beverage  is  always  iiicdicinal.  Possibly  it  would  follow  that  the  pro- 
hibition of  the  use  as  a beverage  might  interfere  with  its  medicinal 
application  in  some  cases.  In  all  the  statutes  which  I have  seen,  the 


Intoxicating  Liquors. 


31 


choice  of  terms  is  between  the  word  “ beverag-e,”  on  the  one  hand, 
leaving  the  article  to  unrestricted  use  for  all  other  purposes,  and  a 
general  prohibition  for  all  purposes,  with  execution  only  of  those 
recognized  cases  of  necessity  which,  being  definitely  known,  could  be 
provided  for,  and  thus  the  abuses  which  might  arise  in  the  other 
method  of  the  statement  be  avoided. 

THE  SECOND  SECTION  EXPRESSLY  GUARDS, 
and  in  some  respects  increases,  the  jurisdiction  of  the  States  as  it  now 
exists  over  the  subject-matter,  and  negatives  any  license  of  the  traffic 
by  implication  until  the  ratification  of  the  proposed  amendment.  True, 
there  could  be  no  real  license  implied  by  the  proposal  of  this  amend- 
ment to  the  States,  but  it  might  be  construed  as  a denial  by  Congress 
of  the  right  of  the  States  to  regulate  or  suppress  the  traffic  to  the  ex- 
tent which  they  are  now  conceded  to  possess  that  power.  It  further 
contains  a concession  by  Congress  of  power  to  the  States  and  Ter- 
ritories to  suppress  the  manufacture,  transportation,  and  sale  of  all 
liquors,  and  to  exclude  them  from  State  and  territorial  limits,  which 
they  have  never  yet  exercised  to  my  knowledge.  Whether  this  would 
nave  the  force  of  law  as  against  existing  constitutional  rights  may  not 
be  a serious  question,  but  it  would  probably  prevent  any  interference 
by  legislation  on  the  part  of  Congress  with  any  action  on  the  part  of 
the  States  or  Territories,  unless  it  should  clearly  be  required  by  the 
Constitution  as  it  now  exists.  Whatever  powers  the  National  Govern- 
ment now  possesses,  such  as  the  right  to  abrogate  or  regulate  the 
traffic  in  the  District  of  Columbia  and  in  the  Territories,  and  to  make 
its  exclusion  forever  from  the  Territories  a part  of  their  fundamental 
law,  and  to  impose  such  a condition  as  inseparable  to  their  admission 
as  States,  are  expressly  reserved.  At  the  same  time  all  the  rights 
which  any  one  engaged  in  the  traffic  now  has  under  State  laws  are 
carefully  preserved  to  him  so  long  as  his  State  shall  not  see  fit  to  inter- 
fere with  him  ; at  least  until  the  first  section  takes  effect,  and  that  does 
not  interfere  with  fermented  liquors  at  all. 

The  amendment  carefully  preseiwes  the  police  power  of  the  State 
over  the  whole  subject  by  providing  that  Congress  shall  enforce  it  only 
in  case  of  needful  legislation.  It  is  designed  to  leave  the  whole  matter, 
concurrently  with  the  General  Government,  still  in  the  power  of  the 
States  respectively,  contemplating  no  interference  with  local  machinery 
and  methods  unless  it  should  become  imperatively  necessary  ; and  it  is 
not  probable  that  much  active  interference  by  the  National  Govern- 
ment would  ever  be  required.  As,  in  the  vindication  of  the  great 
rights  of  the  American  citizen,  legislation,  the  courts,  their  processes, 
and  the  ministerial  officers  of  the  States  are  generally  sufficient  to  pro- 
tect, so  in  this  matter  the  fact  that  the  broad  aegis  of  the  Constitution 
protected  the  American  people  from  the  curse  of  this  traffic  would 
secure  the  ample  enforcement  of  its  beneficent  provisions  by  local  au- 
thorities throughout- the  land. 

Nor  can  there  be  any  valid  objection  to  this  legislation  based  upon 
the  doctrine  of 

STATE  RIGHTS, 

for  the  Constitution  now  asserts  and  exercises  the  power  to  substan- 
•ially  control  or  thwart  the  police  power  of  the  States  by  rendering 


32 


Manufacture  and  Sale  of 


nugatory-  their  efforts  to  regulate  and  suppress  the  e\  .1.  The  police 
powers  of  the  States  are  thus  really  nullified  or  abridged  in  a most  im- 
portant, nay,  a matter  of  vital  concern.  The  deadliest  foe  of  social 
happiness  and  public  order  is  placed  under  the  protection  of  the  na- 
tional Constitution,  and  the  State  must  subordinate  its  process  to  the 
rights  of  rum,  protected  by  the  national  power.  This  amendment 
proposes  to  repeal  those  restrictions  upon  the  rights  of  States  to  gov- 
ern themselves,  and  substitute  provisions  in  harmony  with  the  tenden- 
cies of  enlightened  State  legislation  and  the  interests  of  society,  and 
thus  it  proposes  to  re-inforce  the  police  power  of  the  States  acting  for 
the  public  good.  This  certainly  at  the  worst  is  no  greater  restriction 
of  the  powers  of  the  States  than  now  exists  in  the  Constitution  by  vir- 
tue of  the  protection  given  to  the  liquor  interests  against  which  the 
States,  so  many  of  them,  wage  war.  And  it  is  difficult  to  see  why  an 
advocate  of  State’s  rights  should  be  satisfied  with  the  Constitution  as 
it  is,  and  then  complain  when  it  is  proposed  to  c’nange  the  Constitution 
so  as  to  give  the  States  still  greater  power  to  restrict  and  control  an 
evil  over  which  but  for  this  Constitution  the  States  would  have  abso- 
lute power. 

It  seems  to  me  that  this  is  a sufficient  reply  to  those  who,  claiming 
that  they  desire  to  suppress  the  evil,  object  to  an  increase  of  State 
power  for  that  purpose.  If  the  real  difficulty  is  that  the  objector  would 
relieve  the  liquor  traffic  of  all  legal  disabilities,  whether  State  or  na- 
tional, then  this  view  of  States’  rights  will  not  be  satisfactory.  He 
will  then  be  satisfied  wit’n  no  constitutional  amendment  which  does 
not  destroy  all  “police  power,”  State  or  national,  to  interfere  with  the 
evils  of  alcoholic  intemperance.  “ States’  rights”  is  a teiTn  too  much 
abused  in  these  latter  days,  and  honest  men  should  examine  well  the 
motives  and  pretenses  of  those  who  appeal  to  prejudices  engendered 
by  controversies  which,  with  their  causes,  are  vanished  away.  We 
certainly  are  a nation  to  such  extent  that  a vast  evil  which  contami- 
nates the  atmosphere  of  the  continent  can  be  assailed  with  nadonal 
power,  especially  when  it  can  be  reached  successfully  in  no  other  wa^^ 
and  the  method  proposed  leaves  to  the  States  the  execution  of  the 
great  work  if  they  will  perform  it  in  their  own  self-chosen  way. 

I deem  it  important  to  offer  some  observations  upon  the  policy  and 
efficiency  of  the 

PRINCIPLE  OF  PROHIBITION, 

as  applied  to  the  suopression  of  the  alcoholic  evil.  It  is  not  seldom 
claimed  that  the  policy  of  prohibition  by  law  does  not  diminish  the 
consumption  of  intoxicating  drinks  ; that  human  nature  resents  inter- 
ference with  personal  freedom  ; that  legal  restriction  becomes  a nullity 
and  in  the  end  drunkenness  and  its  attendant  evils  are  increased  ; that 
the  public  conscience  becomes  hardened,  and  the  sense  of  obligation 
to  obey  the  laws  of  the  land  is  blunted,  so  that  the  “ last  state  of  that 
man  (and  nation)  is  worse  than  the  first.”  It  will  be  observed,  how- 
ever, as  a rule,  that  this  argument  is  seldom  advanced  by  those  whose 
interests  or  principles  incline  them  even  so  far  as  to  the  use  of  “ moral 
suasion,”  as  it  is  termed,  to  extirpate  the  evils  of  intemperance,  .^.s  a 
rule,  restrictive  laws  are  opposed  by  the  class  of  people  who  never 
resort  to  moral  suasion  themselves,  and  who  stand  in  need  ot  both 


Intoxicating  Liquors,  33 

'egal  and  moral  suasion  to  counteract  the  tendency  of  either  their  own 
interests  or  appetites  or  both.  How  sincerely  these  people  believe  in 
their  position  that  restrictive  laws  which  they  oppose  increase  the 
evil  upon  which  they  thrive,  every  one  is  to  judge  for  himself.  But 
there  are  a few  who  honestly  entertain  that  opinion.  True  that  no 
law  is  operative  except  as  it  is  made  so  by  public  opinion,  but  the  en- 
actment of  an  evidently  wise  and  necessary  law  should  often  precede 
in  order  that  it  may  assist  in  forming  public  opinion.  Eveiy  stej)  for- 
ward necessarily  precedes  and  draws  along  the  car  of  progress.  Leg- 
islators are  supposed  to  be  selected  because  they  are  wiser  than  the 
mass  of  those  for  whom  they  make  laws ; but  of  what  use  are  they  if, 
naving  mofe  wisdom,  they  are  never  to  exercise  it  until  moral  suasion 
has  raised  the  virtue  of  the  people  so  high  that  the  evil  has  disappeared 
and  consequently  the  laws  are  unnecessary. 

Laws  presuppose  something  wrong  to  be  prohibited,  and  it  does  not 
follow  that  they  are  to  be  repealed  (or  even  not  enacted)  simply  be- 
cause the  sentiment  of  a particular  or  even  of  the  general  community, 
for  the  time  being,  may  not  properly  execute  them.  Agitation  and  the 
effort  to  enforce  a good  law,  by  demonstrating  its  wisdom  and  the 
blessings  which  flow  from  its  enforcement,  will  create  a public  opinion 
which  ultimately  will  m.ake  the  law  generally  operative.  Probably 
there  is  no  criminal  law  whatever  which  is  enforced  in  one-half  the 
instances  of  its  infraction.  Should  the  law  against  theft,  arson,  bur- 
glary, forgery,  and  other  crimes  therefore  be  repealed  ? There  was  a 
condition  of  society,  as  man  has  progressed  from  the  savage  to  the 
enlightened  state,  when  there  was  no  public  conscience  which  took 
cognizance  of  any  of  these  crimes.  Wise  legislators  prescribed  laws  in 
advance  of  public  opinion,  and  by  their  enforcement  educated  their 
peoples  to  a higher  life  and  more  complete  acquiescence  in  the  law. 
But  it  is  said  that  the  enforcement  of  laws  with  us  depends  upon  the 
juries  of  the  country ; so  it  does ; they  are  the  judges  of  the  fact. 
Therefore  they  should  be  impartial.  And  does  any  one  believe  that 
when  a jury  is  selected  with  as  complete  freedom  from  bias  as  if  se- 
lected for  the  trial  of  the  charge  of  murder  there  would  be  any  more 
difficulty  in  punishing  that  crime  against  society  which  occasions  the 
perpetration  of  more  than  three-fourths  of  the  murders?  You  inquire 
of  every  juryman  upon  his  oath  whether  he  is  in  favor  of  capital  pun- 
ishment before  he  is  selected  to  pass  upon  a question  which  involves 
the  life  of  his  fellow-man.  That  man  is  disqualified  to  be  a juror  who 
does  not  believe  in  the  law.  In  the  same  way  ascertain  his  opinion 
as  to  the  enforcement  of  restraining  laws  against  intemperance,  and 
thus  secure  an  impartial  jury  by  putting  each  member  of  the  panel 
upon  his  conscience,  and  there  is  no  trouble  in  enforcing  the  law. 

But  I do  not  design  to  follow  out  this  train  of  thought.  I wish  to 
recall  attention  to  the  fact  that  there  is  no  difference  in  principle,  but 
only  in  the  degree  of  its  application,  between  laws  which  restrain  and 
those  which  totally  prohibit  the  use  of  intoxicating  liquors,  so  that  the 
question  lies  open  only  between  those  who  would  have  some  law  i--nd 
those  who  would  have  710  latu  whatever  upon  the  subject.  Now, 
there  is  no  civilized  people,  and  I venture  the  assertion  that  there  never 
was  one,  where  seriously  intoxicating  liquors  have  existed  which  have 
not  found  it  absolutely  impossible  to  preserve  the  structure  of  society 


34 


Manufacture  and  Sale  of 


without  legal  restriction.  Certainly  there  has  been  none  in  m idem 
times,  and  there  is  none  to-day  so  far  as  1 know. 

I wish  to  cite  one  or  two  instances  in  the  recent  history  of  the  Anglo- 
Saxon  race. 


IN  THE  SENATE  DEBATE 

of  last  session,  page  584  of  the  Record,  Senator  Morrill,  now  the 
distinguished  Secretary  of  the  Treasur)',  said: 

V/e  had  almost  this  identical  question  as  early  as  1795,  when  the  countr}'  was  in  the  di- 
lemm  i of  a large  national  debt.  When  the  Secretary  of  the  Treasury,  Mr.  Hamilton,  was 
casting  about  for  the  means  of  sustaining  the  public  credit,  one  of  the  methods  resorted  to 
was  the  identical  thing  we  are  doing  now  ; that  is,  to  raise  a revenue  upon  the  importa- 
tion and  distilkition  of  alcoholic  drinks,  accompanied  also  by  a system  of  licenses  for  the 
retail  sale  of  alcoholic  drinks  so  manufactured  in  this  country  or  imported  from  abroad. 
Therefore  it  becomes  of  the  utmost  importance  to  inquire  what  was  the  effect  of  that  pol- 
icy upon  the  morals  of  the  people.  How  did  it  come  about  that  about  that  period  we 
came  to  be  denominated  a nation  of  drunkards?  How  was  it  that  it  was  generally  as- 
serted, and  it  is  a matter  of  historj^  to-day.  that  the  American  Colonies  at  the  close  of  the 
war,  and  for  the  two  decades  afterward,  drank  more  liquor, capita^  than  any  other 
people  upon  the  Mce  of  the  globe  ? It  has  usually  been  accounted  for  from  the  pernicious 
effects  of  the  war,  * * * but  it  was  not  the  prime  cause.  Whoever  will  take  the  pains  to 
look  into  our  history  will  find  that  more  than  all  things  together  it  sprang  from  the  policy 
of  raising  a revenue  out  of  the  distillation  of  alcoholic  drinks,  and  the  Government  taking 
into  its  own  hands  the  retail  trade  of  the  country  in  alcoholic  and  intoxicating  drinks. 

In  1795  the  number  of  wine  licenses  was  3.253,  of  spirit  licenses  7,461.  The  amount  of 
duties  854,731*  In  1800  the  Secretary’s  report  says : Of  the  proceeds  of  those  dutie* 
more  than  §500,000  arise  from  tax  on  distillation,  -1=372.000  of  which  are  paid  on  22,000 
country  stills,  scattered  over  the  immense  territory  of  the  United  States.  Sixty-five  thou- 
sand dollars  are  the  product  of  13,000  retailers’  licenses,  all  grown  up  in  a single  decade.” 

Senator  Morrill  then  cites  the  experience  of  England,  which  was 
the  same  as  ours,  and  after  depicting  the  terrible  results  in  powerful 
language,  he  says : 

That  is  the  history  of  it,  and  it  is  as  natural  as  for  water  to  run  down  hill.  It  must  be 
so.  Whenever  the  Government  lends  its  moral  countenance  to,  and  cncourag^es  the 
importation  and  the  production,  of  course  you  can  not,  Senators  will  see  that  it  is  impos-  * 
sible  to,  control  the  sale.  It  becomes  popular,  it  is  taken  out  of  the  ban  at  once,  and 
it  increases  everywhere.  That,  I think,  is  the  historical  account  in  this  country  and 
elsewhere.  It  is  the  natural,  it  is  the  irresistible  effect.  I do  not  know  the  amount 
of  crooked  whisky,  but  I should  suppose  the  distillation  was  not  le.ss  than  100,000,000 
at  least — 

Yearly  in  this  countr}’ — 

for  a people  of  40,000,000,  besides  all  that  is  imported  from  abroad.  What  becomes  of 
if.  * Xhe  statistics  show  beyond  all  controversy,  if  anything  has  ever  been 
made  clear  by  statistics,  that  three-fourths  of  the  pauperism  is  attributable,  directly  and 
indirectly,  to  intoxicating  drinks,  and  three-fourths  of  the  crime  to  the  same  cause. 
Just  contemplate  that  statement,  and  then  see  whether  the  government  of  a count.-y  that 
raises  iis  revenues  by  the  encouragement  of  the  distillation  of  such  an  agency  as  tha 
has  no  connection  with  it.  Why,  sir,  more  than  all  other  agencies  combined  is  the 
terrible  effect  of  alcoholic  drinks  upon  the  health  and  morals  and  prosperity  of  this  people, 
Jt  is  the  gigantic  crime  of  crimes  in  this  age^  and  particularly  in  this  country. 

I would  earnestly  call  attention  to  the  abl“  debate  in  the  Senate 
•from  which  this  is  taken,  and  in  which  several  of  the  most  distinguished 
men  of  the  nation  participated.  The  result  was  the  passing  of  the 
resolution  for  a committee  of  inquiry,  elsewhere  referred  to. 

THE  experience  OF  ENGLAND 

in  the  adoption  of  the  beer  law,  and  in  other  instances,  is  exactly 
similar  to  that  of  the  United  States.  The  removal  of  restrictions  and 
countenance  of  the  business  by  the  Government  expands  the  eUl  just 
as  naturally  and  inevitably  as  the  removal  of  the  dam  lets  out  th« 
Water  behind  it. 


Intoxicating  Liquors. 


35 


Prchibifion  has  been  more  honestly  and  thoroughly  tried  in  the 
State  of  Maine  than  anywhere  else  in  America  or  Europe,  except  per- 
haps in  MohafiitTii,dan  countries,  where  both  religion  and  law  enforce 
total  abstinence. 

Hon.  William  P.  Fi7e,  when  Attorney-General  of  that  State,  writes 
to  Hon.  Neal  Dow  as  follows : 

I can  and  do,  from  my  o\Vn  personal  observation,  unhesitatingly  affirm  that  the  con- 
sumption of  intoxicating  liquors  in  Maine  is  not  to-day  one-fourth  as  great  as  it  was 
twenty  years  ago  ; that  in  the  country  portions  of  the  State  the  sale  and  use  have  almost 
entirely  ceased  ; that  the  law  under  a vigorous  enforcement  of  its  provisions.^ 

has  created  a tetnperance  sentitnent  which  is  tnarvelous.,  and  to  which  oppositio7i  is 
powerless.  In  tny  opi  ni9n.,our  remarkable  temperance  refor^n  of  to-day  is  the  legit-^ 
imate  child  of  the  law. 

To  this  high  and  emphatic  testimony  to  the  fact  that  prohibition 
does  prohibit,  I wish  to  add  this  evidence  from  the  inexorable  figures 
of  the 


CENSUS  OF  1870, 

which  contrasts  the  systems  of  prohibition  and  stringent  license  ; and 
it  such  are  the  comparative  results  between  these,  what  would  be  the 
consequence  of  the  removal  of  all  restrictions,  save  only  as  moral 
suasion  might  oppose  the  whirlwinds  and  tornadoes  of  universal  ruin 
with  the  gentle  putterin.gs  of  the  mellow-voiced  philanthropist  ? 


Maine. 

New 

Jersey. 

72 

280 

36 

25 

8 

338 

1,380 

665 

573 

43 

In  Maine  the  keepers  of  restaurants  do  not  sell  liquors,  while  in 
New  Jersey  they  almost  universally  do.  “Liquors  and  wines”  in 
Maine  refers  to  State  liquor  agents.  The  population  ot  Maine  was 
626,915  ; that  of  New  Jersey  was  906,096. 

In  November,  1867,  Massachusetts  repealed  her  prohibitory  liquor 
law.  In  his  message  to  the  Legislature,  January,  1869,  the  Governor 
said 

The  increase  of  drunkenness  and  crime  during  the  last  six  months,  as  compared  with 
the  same  period  of  1867,  is  very  marked  and  decisive  as  to  the  operation  of  the  law.  The 
State  prisons,  jails,  and  houses  of  correction  are  being  rapidly  filled,  and  will  soon  require 
enlarged  accommodations  if  the  commitments  continue  to  increase  as  they  have  since 
the  present  law  (a  license  law)  w'ent  into  force. 

Although  this  amendment  does  not  propose  to  interfere  with  the 
fermented  liquors  any  more  than  to  remit  their  managemeni  more 
fully  to  the  several  States,  it  not  being  believed  by  me  to  be  suffi- 
ciently clear  that  the  prohibition  of  the  manufacture  and  use  of  such 
liquors  should  be  attempted  by  national  enactment,  so  long  as  public 
sentiment  is  so  considerable  in  favor  of  their  beneficent  effect  when 
properly  used,  and  in  considenation  of  the  comparatively  small  injury 
and  dartger  which  arise  from  their  abuse,  yet  upon  the  question  of  the 
actual  effect  of  prohibitory  laws  upon  the  traffic  the  statistics  of  the 
trade  in  fermented  drinks  are  as  logically  illustrative  as  in  case  of  dis 


36 


MamifacUire  and  Sale  of 


tilled  liquors.  Take  then  the  testimony  of  the  brewers  themselves.  I? 
the  fifteenth  annual  report  of  the  United  States  Brewers’  Association, 
held  at  Cincinnati,  June,  1875,  they  passed  these  resolutions  : 

Resolved.  That  where  restrictive  prohibitory  enactments  exist,  every  possible  measure 
be  taken  to  oppose,  resist,  and  repeal  them. 

And  it  is  further  resolved^  I'hat  politicians  favoring  prohibitory  enactments,  who 
offer  themselves  as  candidates  for  olhce,  be  everywhere  strenuously  opposed,  and  the 
more  so  if  it  be  found  that  their  personal  habits  do  not  conform  to  their  public  profession. 

In  an  address  before  the  convention  it  was  stated  : 

Very  severe  is  the  injr.ry  which  the  brewers  have  received  in  the  so-called  tempciacse 
States. 

Then  follow  data  from  various  States  proving  the  assertion. 

This  testimony  shows  the  hollow  insincerity  of  the  absurd  pretense 
that  prohibitory  laws  do  not  tend  to  eradicate  the  evils  of  intemper- 
a.'ice.  Legal  prohibition  and  moral  suasion  operate  like  the  law  of 
Moses  and  the  Gospel  of  Christ.  They  act  and  react  upon  and  fulhll 
each  other.  And  to  assert  that  law  does  not  destroy  this  evil  and 
therefore  there  should  be  no  law,  is  to  assert  that  there  should  be  law 
against  no  evil  whatever,  since  not  one  based  upon  the  abuse  of  any 
appetite  or  passion  of  man  has  ever  yet  been  absolutely  extirpated. 
Doubtless  the  appetite  for  stimulants  will  always  seek  gratification  by 
excess ; but  society  can  protect  itself  against  the  evils  of  that  excess 
only  by  the  most  strenuous  measures  to  remove  alcohol,  that  terrific 
agency  which  the  last  two  hundred  years  has  brought  into  such  com- 
mon use  that  its  blasting  power  over  the  fairest  regions  and  highest 
civilizations  of  earth  has  become  the  bane  of  both,  and  threatens  with 
destruction  the  future  of  the  race.  So  far  as  the  United  States  are 
concerned  (the  people  of  each  State  dealing  with  it  as  they  please), 
even  then  there  will  remain  alcohol  in  its  fermented  forms  which  were 
the  most  powerful  used  for  five  thousand  five  hundred  years,  and  in 
this  form  alcohol  was  the  curse  and  calamity  of  mankind.  Evasions 
of  this  law  as  of  all  other  laws  will  take  place,  and  there  need  be  no 
sentimental  refinement  upon  the  practical  loss  of  asy  right  which  a 
confirmed  toper  may  desire  to  cherish  for  his  own  personal  comfort. 
Sources  of  gratification  though  limited  will  still  be  found.  But  it  is 
to  be  hoped  that  something  would  be  accomplished  for  the  mass  of 
our  fellow-men,  and  particularly  for  those  innocent  ones  to  whom  the 
great  future  belongs,  and  toward  whom  he  that  would  bequeath  to 
them  the  awful  inheritance  of  drunken  woe  which  is  amassed  and  in- 
creasing daily  on  American  soil,  must  be  a brute  indeed. 


THEORIES  OF  PERSONAL  LIBERTY.  ETC. 

There  is  a theory  of  personal  liberty  which,  sanctioned  by  the  great 
names  of 


JOHN  STUART  MILL, 

and  of  V on  Humboldt  and  others  of  less  distinction,  has  been  advanced 
as  the  insuperable  objection  to  all  legisladon  which  strikes  at  the  use 
of  alcohol  as  a beverage. 

Mill,  in  his  work  on  Civil  Liberty,  pages  170  to  173,  thus  states  that 
theory  in  his  vigorous  way  ; 

There  are  in  out  own  day  gioso  usurpations  Ufon  the  liberty  of  private  life  actually 
practiced  and  still  greater  ones  threatened  with  seme  expectations  of  success  ; and  opin- 
MDS  proposed  which  assert  an  unlimited  right  in  the  public,  not  only  to  prohibit  by  law 


Intoxicating  Liquors. 


37 


ever^'thing  which  it  thinks  ^vTong,  but  in  order  to  get  at  what  it  thinks  wrong  to  prohibit 
any  nuniljcrof  tilings  which  it  admits  to  be  innocent. 

Under  the  name  of  preventing  intemperance  the  people  of  one  English  colony,  and  of 
nearly  one-half  the  United  States,  have  been  interdicted  by  law  from  making  any  ase 
whatever  of  fermented  drinks  except  for  medicinal  purposes  ; yhr  prohibition  o/ their 
saic  is  in  fact.,  as  it  is  intended  to  be^  prohibition  o/  their  use.  The  infringement  com- 
plained of  is  not  on  the  liberty  of  the  seller,  but  on  that  of  the  buyer  and  consumer; 
since  the  State  might  just  as  well  forbid  him  to  drink  wine  as  purposely  make  it  impossi- 
ble J'or  him  to  obtain  it. 

Goverp.or  Andrew  cites  this  passage,  and  so  do  defenders  of  the 
traffic  generilly,  as  decisive  authority  upon  the  subject,  and  it  is  doubt- 
less the  highest  that  he  can  cite.  The  common  sense  of  the  Ameri- 
can people  would,  however,  hardly  accept  without  question  all  the  so- 
cial, economic,  religious,  or  irreligious  theories  of  Mr.  Mill,  and  I re- 
spectfully demur  to  any  theory  which  results  in  the  ruin  of  my  fellow- 
men.  By  their  frtiits  shall  ye  know  them.  That  is  the  only  rule  by 
which  a practical  legislator  has  any  right  to  test  the  theories  of  great 
or  of  little  men. 

But  what  does  even  Mill  himself  say  ? He  asserts,  in  the  first  place, 
what  is  a positiv'e  error,  so  far  as  the  grounds  of  this  amendment  are 
concerned.  I do  7iot  assert  the  right  in  order  to  get  at  what  I think 
wrong,  “ to  prohibit  any  number  of  things  which  I admit  to  be  right.” 
By  no  means  whatever.  I admit  the  manufacture,  importation,  and 
use  of  alcohol  in  the  form  of  distillation  for  certain  necessary  pitrposes, 
and  for  them  only,  to  be  legitimate,  and  convenient,  if  not  necessaiy,  en- 
titled to  protection  and  subject  to  regulation  by  law  only  for  purposes 
of  taxation  like  other  property  and  to  prevent  its  application  to  other 
dangerous  and  destructiv-e  uses  which  injure  and  often  ruin  mankind. 
The  right  to  regulate  the  legitimate  use  and  to  prevent  the  abuse  is 
just  exactly  the  same  right  which  government  has  to  protect  every 
man  in  the  use  of  fire  for  his  happiness,  and  to  prohibit  both  himself 
and  others  from  using  it  as  the  agent  of  wanton  destruction  to  the 
lives  and  property  of  society  at  large.  No  more,  no  less.  Alcohol  is 
a poison,  which  may  be  put  to  good  uses.  When  an  individual  puts 
this  poison  to  a bad  use  the  law  has  the  right  to  interfere,  and  those 
who  make  it  have  the  right  to  enact  the  law  so  that  it  may  interfere ; 
to  prohibit  not  “any  number  of  things  which  it  admits  to  be  inno- 
cent,” but  the  use  of  an  active  means  of  self  and  social  destruction. 
Thus  it  is  clear  that  Mr.  Mill,  if  he  means  us,  has  misconceived  his 
form  of  action  and  must  either  bring  a new  suit  or  abandon  his  case. 

But  he  goes  on  to  illustrate  and  apply  what  he  means  by  his  gener- 
al proposition  above  stated.  He  says,  “ The  use  of  ferinented  liquors 
has  been  interdicted  except  for  medicinal  use,”  etc.  But  this  amend- 
ment does  not  intermeddle  with  their  use  at  all.  It  is  not  designed 
to.  It  is  not  designed  to  raise  that  difficult  question  upon  which  man- 
kind is  divided.  True,  it  increases  the  police  power  of  the  States  over 
the. m indirectly,  but -not  in  a way  to  restrict  their  use  unless  public 
sentiment  of  the-State  requires  it.  This  is  done  by  an  increase  of  the 
power  of  internal  State  police.  It  is  a surrender  of  national  power. 
It  is  a concession  to  the  States  of  a power  of  interstate  and  foreign 
commerce.  It  only  strikes  at  what  all,  or  nearly  all,  men  concede  to 
be  a most  terrible  national  evil  which  ought  to  be  suppressed  and  which 
can  not  be  effectually  regulated  except  by  a national  prohibition,  which 
must  take  the  form  of  an  amendment  to  the  Constitution.  I am 


38  Manufacture  and  Sale  of 

Sure  tlat  .,t  will  be  conceded  that  the  citation  from  Mr  Mill  is  irrele- 
vant. 

BARON  VON  HUMBOLDT 

is  also  quoted  by  Governor  Andrew  and  others.  See  his  Sphere  and 
Duties  of  Government,  page  171,  where  he  says  ; 

The  State  may  content  itself  with  exercising  the  most  watchful  vigilance  of  every 
unlawful  project  and  defeating  it  before  it  has  been  put  into  execution  ; or,  advancing 
further,  it  may  prohibit  actions  which  are  harmless  in  themselves,  but  which  tempt  to  the 
commission  of  crimes  or  afford  opportunity  for  resolving  upon  criminal  actions.  This 
latter  policy  again  tends  to  encroach  ;.ii  ihe  liberty  of  the  citizens  ; manifests  a distrust 
on  the  part  of  the  State  which  not  only  operates  h artfully  on  the  character  of  the  citizens 
but  goes  to  defeat  the  very  end. in  vicvv.  All  that  the  State  may  do  without  frustrating 
it.s  own  end,  and  without  encroaching  on  the  freedom  of  its  citizens,  is  therefore  restricted 
to  the  former  course  ; that  is,  the  strictest  surveillance  of  every  transgression  of  the  law 
either  already  committed  or  only  resolved  on  ; and  as  this  can  not  properly  be  called 
preventing  the  causes  of  crime,  1 think  I may  safely  assert  that  this  prevention  of 
criminal  actions  is  wholly  foreign  to  the  State’s  proper  sphere  of  activity. 

The  essence  of  all  this  seems  to  be  in  the  concluding  idea.  viz. : that 
the  State  can  not  legislate  by  imposing  burdens  or  restrictions  upon 
the  individual,  the  object  of  which  is  to  prevent  the  causes  of  criinc. 
Well,  supposing  this  to  be  so,  does  it  reach  the  foundations  of  legis- 
lation restricting  the  evils  resulting  from  the  use  of  intoxicating  liquors? 
Obviously  not,  unless  those  evils  are  simply  causes  of  crime.  But 
those  evils  embrace  not  merely  crime  against  the  individual  and 
society  at  large,  but  physical  degeneration  of  the  individual  and  of 
the  species,  insanity,  idiocy,  pauperism — every  form  and  degree  of 
misery,  taxation,  public  burdens  of  every'  kind,  poverty,  starvation, 
accident  and  frightful  casualties,  ignorance,  and  death. 

Now  many  of  these  effects  of  the  wrongful  use  of  distilled  spirits 
exist  independently  as  distinct  and  most  deplorable  public  evils,  and 
would  do  so  even  though  they  did  not  so  often  culminate  in  every  sort 
of  crime.  But  this  proposition  of  Humboldt’s  covers  the  case  of 
causes  of  crime  alone,  and  if  legislation  for  the  prevention  of  these 
evils  is  not  within  the  power  of  the  State,  then  1 am  at  loss  to  see 
what  forms  of  preventive  legislation  are  pxDssible.  The  doctrine  is 
universal  license  and  anarchy,  if  it  is  to  be  understood  to  cover  the 
ground  which  is  claimed  for  it.  It  not  only  abolishes  the  old  truth, 
which,  however  homeiy  in  its  expression,  is  the  basis  of  the  great  mass 
of  the  laws  to  which  society  owes  it  happiness  and  all  hope  of  future 
improvement — that  an  ounce  of  prevention  is  worth  a pound  of  cure. 
Can  not  legislate  to  prevent  the  causes  of  crime  without  violating 
personal  liberty  ! Then  personal  liberty,  which  does  not  include  the 
right  to  commit  crime,  does  include  the  right  to  cause  it  to  be  com- 
muted. But  the  great  Humboldt  is  misquoted,  for  obsert'e  the  con- 
fusion of  thought  and  the  utter  nonsense  of  his  language  if  it  is  to  be 
construed  as  covering  this  case.  I revere  his  intellectual  power,  but 
there  is  only  one  God,  and  the  man  who  undertakes  to  construct  a 
universe  or  a Kosmos  will  not  always  manifest  the  attributes  of  the 
Almighty.  He  says  “ that  the  State  is  restricted  to  the  strictest  sur- 
veillance of  every  transgression  of  the  law,  either  already  ri?w;/7z/'/z'(/  or 
only  resolved  upon."  But  this  is  a question  of  the  original  enactment — • 
the  creation  of  a law,  not  of  its  violation  or  of  its  enforcement.  Shall 
there  be  any  law  at  all  upon  the  subject  ? What  is  a crime  in  the 
only  sense  with  which  we  have  anything  to  do  ? Why,  it  is  the  violi- 


Intoxicating  Liquors. 


39 


tion  of  an  existing  law  ; doing  what  is  already  forbidden  or  failing  to 
do  that  whicli  is  enjoined  ; or,  in  Mr.  Webster’s  own  words  • “ An 
omission  of  a duty  which  is  commanded,  or  the  commission  of  an  act 
which  is  forbidden  by  law.”  So  far  as  government  is  concerned  there 
can  be  no  crime,  and  therefore  no  causes  of  crime  until  there  is  a law 
the  violation  of  which  is  all  that  constitutes  crime. 

Now  the  question  between  alcohol  and  its  opponent  is,  whether  there 
shall  be  any  law  at  all,  and  the  answer  to  that  question  depends  alto- 
gether upon  the  consequences  which  the  unrestricted  use  of  alcohol 
exerts  upon  mankind.  Does  it  or  does  it  not  produce  such  evils  in 
society  as  to  require  or  justify  its  restriction  by  law — the  creation  of 
a law — the  violation  of  which  will  be  a crime  ? The  mere  fact  that 
a drunken  man  is  more  likely  to  commit  murder  than  a sober  man  is 
of  course  no  reason  vvhy  he  should  be  punished  for  being  drunk, 
unles  there  is  a law  against  it.  Until  there  is  a law  against  it,  drunk- 
enness is  no  crime.  So,  if  being  drunk,  he  commits  murder,  then  he  is 
to  be  punished  because  he  has  violated  the  law  against  taking  life, 
not  because  he  was  drunk.  Drunk  or  sober,  then,  he  is  to  be  punished 
for  his  violation  of  law. 

But  now  in  this  debate  comes  this  question  : Is  the  fact  that  drunk- 
enness is  a state  of  mind  and  body  which  is  so  bad  and  dangerous  a 
thing  of  itself  for  members  of  society  to  be  in,  that  voluntarily  getting 
into  that  state  should  be  prohibited,  and  is  the  making  and  selling 
that  stuff  which  tempts  and  makes  men  to  get  drunk  for  that  very 
purpose  so  bad  a thing  that  the  manufacture  and  sale  of  it  should  be 
prohibited  by  law  I And  upon  that  point  the  facts  I have  spread  out 
are  pertinent.  To  do  that  which  causes  three-fourths  of  all  the  crimes 
known  to  the  law  should  itself  be  made  a crime.  It  is  bad  itself,  and 
should  therefore  be  prohibited  by  law.'  It  is  a question  of  making  a 
new  law,  not  of  enforcing  an  old  one.  It  is  therefore  not  at  all  within  the 
reasoning  of  Von  Humboldt,  and  the  citation  as  an  authority  falls. 
New  laws  must  be  made  according  to  the  times.  The  duty  of  govern- 
ment is  ever  the  same  : to  protect  society  and  promote  the  general 
welfare.  The  special  laws  of  different  nations  an  d ages  vary  according 
to  the  forms  in  which  vice  presents  itself,  and  the  various  agencies 
and  forms  of  destruction  with  which  society  is  assailed.  Alcohol  is 
the  parent  of  nearly  all  the  forms  of  misery  in  this  age  and  of  three- 
fourths  of  the  grand  aggregate  of  all  the  crimes  that  are  known,  and 
surely  that  which  produces  all  these  is  a legitimate  subject  for  regu- 
lation by  law.  To  say  that  society  shall  not  control  the  dram-shops 
which  line  our  streets  is  to  say  that  any  man  has  the  right  to  plant 
Pennsylvania  avenue  with  torpedoes  and  drape  Broadway  with  old 
clothes  from  the  pest-houses,  because  the  toi-pedo  and  old  clothes  are 
property  and  a legitimate  subject  of  barter  and  sale  ; and  that  because 
the  torpedo  and  garments  have  their  uses  when  they  preseia'^e  a 
people  and  promote  the  general  welfare,  for  that  reason  they  may 
be  used  to  destroy  the  nation  and  people  which  they  were  designed 
to  preserve. 

THE  FALLACY  IS  HERE. 

It  is  assumed  that  because  alcohol  may  be  manufactured  and  sold 
for  som;  purposes,  it  follows  that  it  therefore  must  be  permitted  for 


40 


Manufacture  and  Sale  of 


all.  This  is  not  so.  Some  things  are  beneficial  in  every  form  and 
way  in  which  they  are  appropriated  to  the  service  of  mankind.  Other 
things  have  uses  for  which  they  are  necessary  and  beneficial,  and 
again  their  appropriation  may  be  disastrous  to  society;  and  Mhen 
they  become  so,  society,  through  the  law,  must  protect  itself.  All  laws 
restrict  personal  liberty  when  that  much-abused  term  is  used  in  the 
sense  of  license.  I do  not  think  it  important  to  call  further  attention 
to  the  ipse  dixit  of  theorists  whose  conclusions  have  been  contradicted 
by  experience  and  rejected  by  good  sense  wherever  mankind  have 
existed  under  the  dominion  of  law.  But  the  constitutionality  of  pro- 
hibitory or  restrictive  laws  in  the  States  has  been  settled  by  all  the 
courts  of  the  country  ; and  I have  previously  endeavored  to  show  that 
the  right  to  license  one  man  is  the  right  to  restrict  all  others,  and  im- 
plies the  right  to  totally  restrict  when  the  public  good  requires.  The 
general  proposition  is  that  the  States  have  tnis  power  ; that  it  should 
be  extended  and  exercised  over  the  whole  country  in  the  only  way  in 
which  it  effectually  can  be,  by  an  amendment  of  the  Constitution  of 
the  country  giving  concurrent  power  to  the  nation  to  make  the  pro- 
hibition general  and  efficient  whenever  isolated  States  shall  fail. 

I desire  to  cite  a few  sentences  from  the  opinions  of 

THE  SUPREME  COURT 

of  this  country  in  the  celebrated  license  cases.  These  cases  were 
argued  by  Daniel  Webster,  Rufus  Choate,  B.  F.  Hallett,  John  P.  Hale, 
and  others,  in  favor  of  the  licensees  ; and  by  very  able  counsel  on  the 
other  side.  I believe  that  the  opinions  are  considered  by  the  profession 
as  very  able  and  well  considered.  The  court  was  unanimous,  and 
most  of  the  judges  delivered  separate,  though  according  opinions. 
The  cases  are  reported  in  5 Howard,  504-633. 

Judge  Taney  says,  page  576  : 

The  laws  of  Congress  regulating  foreign  commerce  authorize  the  importation  of 
spirits,  distilled  liquors,  and  brandy,  in  casks  or  vessels  not  containing  less  than  a 
certain  quantity  specined  in  the  laws  upon  this  subject.  Now  if  the  State  laws  in  ques- 
tion come  in  collision  with  those  acts  of  Congress,  and  prevented  or  obstructed  the 
importation  or  sale  of  these  articles  by  the  importer  in  the  original  cask  or  vessel  in 
which  they  were  imported,  it  would  be  the  duty  of  this  court  to  declare  them  void. 

On  page  577  : 

If  any  State  deems  the  retail  and  internal  traffic  in  ardent  spirits  injurious  to  its  citizens 
and  calculated  to  produce  idleness,  vice,  and  debauchery,  1 see  nothing  in  the  C(^sti- 
tution  of  the  United  States  to  prevent  it  from  regulating  and  restraining  the  trainc  or 
from  prohibiting  it  altogether  if  it  thinks  proper. 

On  page  579  : 

It  appears  to  me  to  be  very  cUar  that  the  mere  g^rant  o/ boiver  to  the  General 
ernment  can  not  upon  any  just  principles  of  construction  be  construed  to  he  an  absolute 
prohibition  to  the  exercise  o/  any  power  over  the  same  subject  by  the  States, 

I call  attention  to  the  language  in  italics  as  also  bearing  upcjn  the 
nature  of  the  concurrent  and  co-operative  jurisdiction  which  this 
amendment  proposes  to  give,  both  to  the  States  and  the  nation,  over 
the  subject-matter  of  distilled  liquors. 

Judge  McLean,  on  pages  588  and  following,  says  : 

The  license  laws  of  Massachusetts  are  essentially  police  /aws  ; enactments  similar  in 
principle  are  comm.on  to  all  the  States.  A great  moral  refo-Tn  which  enlisted  the  judg- 
ments and  excited  the  sympathies  of  the  public  has  given  notoriety  to  this  course  of 
egislation  and  extended  it  lately  beyond  its  former  limit  The  acknowledged  polici 


Intoxicating  Liquors. 


41 


power  of  a State  extends  often  to  the  destruction  of  property.  A nuisance  may 
abolished.  Everything  prejudicial  to  the  health  or  morals  of  a city  may  be  removed; 
merchandise  from  a port  where  a contagious  disease  prevails  being  liable  to  communicate 
the  disease,  may  be  excluded,  and  in  extreme  cases  may  be  thrown  into  the  sea.  It  is  a 
power  essential  to  self-preservation,  and  exists  necessarily  in  every  organized  community. 
It  is  indeed  a law  of  nature,  and  is  possessed  by  man  in  his  individual  capacity.  Me  may 
resist  that  which  does  him  harm,  whether  he  be  assailed  by  an  assassin  or  approached  by 
poison;  audit  is  tlie  settled  construction  of  every  regulation  of  commerce  that  under  the 
sanction  of  its  general  laws  no  person  can  introduce  into  a community  malignant  diseases 
or  any  thing  which  contaminates  its  morals  or  endangers  its  safety.  Individuals  in  the 
enjoyment  of  their  Own  rights  must  be  careful  not  to  injure  the  rights  of  others.  From 
the  explosive  nature  of  gunpowder,  a cit}^  may  exclude  it.  * * * These  are  acts  of 

self-preservation.  * ^ the  progress  of  population,  of  wealth,  and  civilization, 

new  and  vicious  indulgences  sj>ring  which  requh'e  restraints  which  can  only  be 
imposed  by  legislative  />ower. 

Judge  Woodbury  says,  page  630  : 

After  articles  have  come  within  the  territorial  limits  of  States,  whether  on  land  or  wa- 
ter, the  destruction  itself  of  what  constitutes  disease  and  death,  and  the  longer  continu- 
ance of  such  articles,  or  the  terms  and  conditions  of  their  continuance,  when  conflicting 
with  their  legitimate  police,  or  with  their  power  over  internal  commerce,  or  with  their 
right  of  taxation  over  all  persons  and  property  within  their  jurisdiction,  seems  one  of  the 
first  principles  of  State  sovereignty  and  indispensable  to  public  safety. 

It  would  be  easy,  sir,  to  multiply  authority  from  all  the  courts  of  the 
country,  which  assert,  I think,  with  unvarying  uniformity,  the  power 
of  the  State  to  control  absolutely  the  use  of  alcohol,  subject  only  to 
the  protection  given  it  by  the  Constitution  of  the  United  States,  the 
extent  to  which  it  shall  be  exerted  being  purely  a matter  of  expediency, 
while  against  this  power  and  its  exercise  can  be  found  nothing  but  the 
speculations  of  writers  whose  theories  are  either  untenable  or  inappli- 
cable to  this  or  perhaps  any  other  state  of  society  which  can  arise  un- 
til the  millennium  shall  abolish  all  law  by  the  absolute  extirpation  of 
evil  from  among  men. 

IN  RECAPITULATION  AND  CONCLUSION,  SIR, 

I only  wish  further  to  say  that  by  the  indulgence  of  the  House  I have 
thus  at  great,  but  I hope  not  at  unnecessary  length  endeavored  to  call 
the  attention  of  Congress  and  of  the  country  to  the  vast  and  increas- 
ing public  evils  which  exist  in  the  land,  whose  origin  lies  in  the  excess- 
ive use  of  that  most  powerful  poison  known  as  alcohol.  I have  not 
dealt  in  specific  instances,  but  in  masses  of  fact  as  they  have  been  gath- 
ered and  accumulated  here  and  there  by  the  statistician,  the  census- 
taker,  the  official  investigator,  and  mest  of  all  by  that, noble  profession 
which  comprises  so  many  of  the  ablest  and  best  of  men — a profession 
whose  theory  is  the  gospel  of  man’s  physical  and  mental  nature,  and 
whose  practice  is  philanthropy  applied  to  the  details  of  all  human  woe 
— the  medical  profession,  which  by  its  researches  in  the  chemical  world 
and  its  incessant  and  protracted  pursuit  of  the  recondite  origin  of  dis- 
ease and  of  the  philosophy  of  suffering  and  despair,  as  well  as  of  ths 
sources  of  vigor  and  hope  and  happiness  to  mankind,  has  placed  civil- 
ization under  the  largest  debt  that  is  due  to  any  of  the  learned  orders 
of  society ; that  profession,  sir,  has  not  failed  to  stamp  upon  alcohol 
the  mark  of  Cain  among  poisons.  It  is  the  murderer  of  men.  That 
noble  profession  has  brought  it  to  the  doors  of  the  Capitol,  and  charged 
it  with  the  wholesale  death  ot  our  people.  They  assail  it  as  the  pes- 
tilence which  walketh  in  ihe  darkness  and  which  wasteth  in  the  noon- 
day— as  the  parent  of  every  crime,  as  the  cup  of  misery  ever  full ; the 
orolific  source  of  ignorance,  poverty,  squalor,  idiocy,  insanity  in  all  its 


4? 


l^civMfacture  and  bale  ot 


dreadful  forms,  personal  ruin,  social  destruction,  national  ruin — the 
prune  agency  of  hell  on  the  earth.  And  with  them  com.e  all  classes 
and  conditions  of  men.  These  are  not  witnesses  whose  testimony  can 
be  denied  or  gainsaid.  I will  not  speak  of  woman  in  rags  and  dishev- 
eled hair,  with  her  wan  cheek  and  hollow  voice,  nor  of  her  children 
shivering  on  the  comers  of  the  street,  starving  within  the  shadow  of 
churches  built  to  the  Most  High  with  the  price  of  their  blood.  It  is 
not  fitting  here  to  be  sentimental,  nor  would  I attempt  it  if  permitted. 
The  gravity  of  the  occasion  has  passed  beyond  all  necessity  of  resort 
to  touching  tales  and  strokes  of  pathetic  imagery.  The  evil  is  before 
us.  Its  infinite  extent  must  be  admitted.  There  is  nothing  to  be  con- 
sidered but  the  remedy  and  its  application.  I have  endeavored  to  pre- 
sent one  that  seems  to  me  to  have  been  born  of  hope. 

This  measure  is  not  proposed  by  any  party  that  now  exists.  I trust 
that  it  will  encounter  opposition  from  no  party  whatever.  It  has  been 
prepared  with  the  knowledge  of  scarcely  any  one.  I am  alone  respon- 
sible for  it.  It  is  not  the  project  of  “ temperance  men,”  as  they  are 
sometimes  called,  whether  derisively  or  otherwise.  On  the  contrary, 
mistaking  its  true  character  and  misconceiving  its  far-reaching  conse- 
fiuences,  and  its  avoidance  of  conflict  with  the  interests  and  passions 
of  the  present  time,  “ temperance  men  ” have  complained  that  it  is  an 
evasion  of  the  conflict.  I fear  that  fifteen  years  of  agitation  will  con- 
vince such  of  us  as  may  then  be  alive  that  this  objection  does  not  rec- 
ognize the  great  power  of  existing  forces  which  must  be  overcome. 
It  should  be  remembered  that  no  battle  is  won  until  the  enemy  is  driv- 
en from  his  position.  He  is  now  ixtrenched  in  the  Constitution  of  this 
country.  The  battle  may  go  on  as  it  has  gone  on  for  fifty  years,  '.\’ith- 
out  one  single  blow  being  struck  at  the  manufacture  of  alcohol.  And 
as  hitherto  “ men  may  come  and  men  may  go  ” and  thousands  may 
continue  to  fall  on  either  side,  yet  the  battle  remain  forever  undecided, 
because  the  struggle,  however  violent,  is  renewed  forever  by  the  recruits 
of  successive  generations.  There  is  no  concentration  of  forces  upon 
the  main  position.  Effort  is  lost  because  misdirected.  Muck  of  it,  to 
be  sure,  is  not  wholly  lost.  Moral  suasion — that  is,  argument  and  pre- 
cept and  exhortation,  from  the  pulpit,  the  rostrum,  the  press,  and  pri- 
vate admonition — fnolds  public  opinion  and  accomplislres  wonders  for 
individual  men,  but  it  lacks  the  powerful  re-inforcement  of  national 
law.  That  it  can  never  get  until  it  asks  for  and  demands  it.  This  rev- 
olution in  national  law  can  be  wrought  only  by  years  of  agitation  and 
effort.  Local  sentiment  must  be  awakened  almost  everywhere  ; in  at 
least  two-thirds  of  the  country  existing  opinion  must  be  reversed  be- 
fore the  Constitution  of  the  country  in  this  respect  can  be  changed. 
Meanwhile  each  State  retains  all  the  power  it  now  has  over  both  fer- 
mented and  distilled  liquors,  and  as  soon  as  this  measure  has  been  rat- 
ified there  would  be  conferred  upon  the  States  largely  increised  con- 
trol over  both.  Discussion  and  effort  would  demand  fhe  attention  of 
the  iiation  as  such,  and  a concentration  of  the  whole  army  upon  a com- 
prehensive plan  of  battle  to  carry  the  cifadel  would  be  substituted  for 
isolated  and  sporadic  warfare.  And  when  the  battle  is  once  gained  it 
is  won  for  all  time.  This  form  of  effort  is  infinitely  the  best  way  in 
which  to  accomplish  local  reform.  The  facts  and  arguments  upon 
tvhu  h the  temperance  reform  is  based  are  the  same,  whether  urgea  to 


Intoxicating  Liquors. 


41 


Influence  the  action  of  the  individual,  the  local  opinion,  or  Legislature 
of  a single  State,  or  the  nation  at  large;  and  the  modification  of  tlie 
national  Constitution  involves  that  universal  local  effort  and  the  crea- 
tion of  that  public  sentiment  everywhere  which  will  result  in  the  enact- 
ment and  enforcement  of  prohibitory  State  and  territorial  laws. 

Temperance  men  object  because  the  first  clause  of  this  amendment 
if  adopted  does  not  become  operative  until  1900.  They  fear  that  they 
will  die  without  the  sight.  So  they  may,  but  how  can  they  object 
antil  they  have  tried  to  sec  whether  they  can  obtain  even  this?  Con- 
sider the  past.  Be  admonished  by  history.  Do  not  lose  everything 
by  attempting  the  impracticable.  Remember  that  this  is  an  effort  to 
procure  the  enactment  of  a law,  which  must  carry  the  heads  and  hearts 
of  conservative  jurists,  of  dignified  and  unconvinced  legislators,  and 
poptelar  vote.  This  is  a different  thing  from  enthusing  a popular 
assembly  under  the  magnetism  of  Mr.  Gough.  Do  not  forget  either 
that  it  is  to  be  the  act  of  the  natio7i;  that,  however  it  may  be  as  between 
God  and  alcohol,  however  it  may  be  between  the  maker  of  alcohol 
and  the  higher  law,  yet  we  as  a iiation  have  assured  the  maker  and 
dealer  in  liquor  that  he  might  vest  his  capital  in  permanent  forms, 
that  he  might  manufacture  this  article  for  all  purposes  whatever,  and 
that  we  would  protect  him  in  the  enjoyment  of  his  capital  and  the 
production  of  his  still.  We  take  from  his  industry  yearly  vast  sums 
ij.  the  way  of  taxation  for  the  support  of  the  Government.  True, 
this  legalized  destruction  of  national  wealth  infinitely  transcends  the 
advantage  of  the  tax,  but  nevertheless  we  have  legalized  the  traffic 
for  a century.  Now  have  we  as  a nation  any  right  at  once  to 
destroy  his  industry  and  turn  the  distiller  and  his  family  upon  the 
street  to  starve  ? Is  he  not  entitled  to  reasonable  notice  of  the 
change  in  the  national  policy,  that  he  may  gradually  divert  his 
capital  and  turn  his  business  capacity  in  some  other  direction  and 
train  his  sons  in  some  other  employment  ? And  if  this  view  does  not 
strike  you  with  force,  then  consider  the  further  fact  that  there  are 
more  than  $500,000,000,  probably  $1,000,000,000,  vested  in  this  traffic 
to-day  in  the  United  States,  and  that  such  an  interest  will  for  many 
years  to  come  have  sufficient  power  to  defeat  any  measure  which 
destroys  it  at  once. 

But  liquor  makers  and  sellers  are  me’d.  Great  numbers  o'  them 
are  respectable  and  honest  men.  I have  no  sympathy  with  the  whole- 
sale denunciation  of  them  as  a criminal  class.  Many  of  them  recog- 
nize the  dreadful  consequences  which  flow  from  the  business  in  which 
they  are  '•-g-igod  ■ yet  it  is  a lawful  business;  circumstances  over 
which  often  they  have  no  control  have  identified  them  with  it  just  as 
ethers  have  found  their  way  into  the  pulpit,  into  Congress,  or  into 
other  avocations  of  life.  It  is  no  more  just  to  denounce  them  as  cold- 
hearted  villains,  intent  upon  nothing  but  the  destruction  of  mankind, 
than  it  is  to  assail  the  personal  integrity  of  every  man  who  ever  owned 
a slave.  If  approached  in  a proper  spirit  with  a proposed  reform  in 
which  they  should  be  recognized  as  men  and  invited  and  urged  upon 
considerations  which  must  influence  any  humane  being,  and  which 
would  give  them  a chance  to  save  themselves  and  their  families,  I be- 
lieve that  the  actual  co-operation  of  many  liquor  makers  and  sellers 
could  be  secured. 


44 


Manufacture  and  Sale  of 

Since  the  introduction  of  this  resolution  it  has  been  attacked  as  % 
palpable  effort  to  curry  favor  with  the  prohibitory  sentiment  of  the 
country,  and  at  the  same  time  avoid  offense  to  the  “ beer  element.” 
It  is  no  such  thing.  This  measure  is  not  of  that  radical  nature  to  com- 
mand the  vehement  approbation  of  what  are  known  as  prohibitory 
men,  though  it  must  and  I trust  will  command  increasingly  their  ap- 
proval. _ But  the  question  of  the  manufacture  and  use  of  "fermented 
liquors  is  left  where  it  now  is,  with  the  /States,  because  it  is  medlcall.y 
still  an  open  question  whether  the  restricted  use  of  such  liquors  is  not 
beneficial  to  the  people,  although  their  use  is  fast  becoming  excessive 
and  an  abuse.  But  there  is  - very  slight  difference  of  opinion  as  to  the 
destructive  tendency  of  distilled  liquors  as  administered  by  the  “ laity,” 
and  all  s.gree  that  the  great  mass  of  the  evils  of  intemperance  arise 
from  their  manufacture  and  use  as  a beverage.  And  if  the  ban  of  the 
law  can  be  placed  upon  the  manufacture  and  use  of  distilled  alcoholic 
liquors  as  a beverage,  the  minor  abuses  resulting  from  fermented  liquors 
can  well  be  left  wholly  to  the  restraining  powers  of  the  States,  as  en- 
larged by  the  second  clause  of  the  proposed  amendment.  \Vliile  by 
no  means  of  a callous  organization,  I certainly  do  not  complain  of 
criticism  which  attacks  my  loersonal  motives,  some  of  which  has  been 
brought  to  my  attention.  Those  motives  are  not  revelant  to  the 
measure  itself.  And  whatever  may  be  said  by  others,  I am  consoled 
by  the  consciousness  that  this  step  is  taken  after  long  refiection,  that 
my  motives  are  satisfactory  to  m^  self,  and  that  they  will  be  judged  by 
the  only  tribunal  to  whom  they  can  be  sorely  known  and  whose  approvjd 
is  of  much  consequence. 

The  opposition  of  the  consumer  to  any  national  measure  which 
should  at  once  deprive  him  of  his  beverage,  would  be  found  to  be  very 
serious  and  I fear  decisive.  But  there  is  no  class  of  men  who  have  a 
stronger  desire  to  see  their  children  saved  from  the  chains  which 
hold  them  to  their  own  dreadful  doom,  than  the  drunkards  of  this 
country.  This  measure  has  been  sneered  at  as  a proposed  reform — 
for  posterity.  So  it  is;  and  as  such  it  ought  and  I think  will  enlist 
the  Overwhelming  force  of  parental  feeling  in  its  favor  whenever 
the  public  mind  has  studied  its  peculiar  features  and  elements  of 
strength. 

I think  that  existing  parties  may  well  hesitate  to  oppose  this 
measure.  The  cause  it  represents  is  one  of  moral  reform,  and  it 
must  be  re-inforced  by  legislation.  In  due  time  it  wiU  be.  If  neither 
of  the  great  parties  now  dividing  the  country  see  fit  to  antagonize  it, 
this  measure  will  force  its  way  without  being  made  the  source  and 
object  of  political  strife.  Becoming  operative  so  long  in  the  future, 
it  ought  not  to  provoke  the  opposition  of  any  political  organization, 
and  nil  men  should  be  able  to  consider  this  subject  calmly  and  to 
decide  it  upon  its  merits.  If  it  is  a measure  eidisting  the  moral 
convictions  and  humane  sentiments  of  the  people,  and  especially 
of  that  nucleus  of  able,  conscientious,  and  aggressive  men  who 
are  ultimately  the  ruling  power  in  every  progressive  nation,  although 
for  years  thcj-  way  struggle  on  fighting  and  dying  under  the  banner 
of  defeat,  it  will  be  well  for  all  parties  that  would  live  to  beware  how 
tb  ey  oppose  this  proposition.  At  least  let  it  have  fair  consideration 
by  the  House  and  the  country,  for  it  is  a subject  which  will  have  eon- 


Intoxicating  Liquors.  45 

eidoration.  It  is  not  a ghost,  nor  mil  it  '^down.”  _ I ask  for 
the  considerate  attention  of  all  men  no-w,  for  the  time  is  comina 
when  it  will  be  forced  upon  them.  The  political  exigency  which 
absorbs  and  distracts  the  country  will  pass  away,  but  this  evil 
will  not  pass  away.  Its  extirpation  will  be  imperiously  demanded  long 
after  the  q^uestion  of  the  succession  to  the  Presidency  shall  have  been 
settled  whether  by  peace  or  by  war.  Public  men  will  be  destroyed 
who  touch  it,  but  the  cause  will  survive.  Stronger  arms  will  up- 
hold and  advance  the  banner  until  victory  floats  its  ample 
folds;  and  the  Constitution  of  the  country  shall  yet  become  the 
pledge  of  sobriety  and  temperance  among  the  people  the  ally  of 
virtue,  and  not  the  charter  of  this  great  source  of  ignorance,  misery  and 
srime. 

COMMISSION  OF  ENQUIEY. 

The  following  is  the  BUI  r^erred  to  on  the  21st  page  of  this  pamplM,  which, 
having  passed  the  Senate  of  the  United  States,  is  bfore  the  Mouse  of  Bepresen- 
tativesfor  consideration : 

•a  bill  to  provide  for  the  appointment  of  commissioners  on  the  subject  op  th* 

ALCOHOLIC  AND  FERMENTED-LIQUOR  TRAFFIC  AND  MANUFACTURE. 

**  it  euacied,  etc. : Th?it  for  the  purpose  of  obtaining  information  which  may  servo 
as  a guide  to  the  system  ot  legislation  best  fitted  for  the  District  of  Columbia,  the  several 
Territories  of  the  United  States,  and  other  places  subject  to  the  legislation  of  Congress 
in  reference  to  the  question  of  revenue  from  the  manufacture  and  sale  of  alcoholic  and 
fermented  liquo’-s,  and  the  effect  of  the  use  of  such  liquors  upon  the  morals  and  weUaro 
of  the  people  of  such  District,  Territories,  and  places,  there  shall  be  appointed  by  th« 
President,  by  and  with  the  advice  and  consent  of  the  Senate,  a commission  of  five  per- 
sons neither  of  whom  shall  be  the  holder  of  any  office  of  profit  or  trust  in  the  General 
or  a State  Government,  and  all  of  whom  shall  not  be  advocates  of  prohibitory  legislation 
or  total  abstinence  in  relation  to  alcoholic  or  fermented  liquors.  The  said  commissioners 
shall  be  selected  solely  witih  reference  to  peisonal  fitness  and  capacity  for  an  honest,  im- 
partial, and  thorough  investigation,  and  shall  hold  office  until  their  duties  shall  be  accom- 
plished, but  not  to  exceed  one  year.  It  shall  be  their  duty  to  investigate  the  alcoholic 
and  fermented  liquor  traffic  and  manufacture,  having  special  reference  to  revenue  and  tax- 
ation, distinguishing  as  far  as  possible,  in  the  conclusions  they  arrive  at  between  the 
fects  produced  by  the  use  of  distilled  or  spirituous  liquors  and  the  use  of  fermented  or 
malt  liquors,  in  their  economic,  criminal,  moral,  and  scientific  aspects,  in  connection  with 
pauperism,  crime,  social  vice,  the  public  health,  and  general  welfare  of  the  people  ; and 
also  enquire  and  take  testimony  as  to  the  practical  results  of  license  and  restrictive  legis- 
lation for  the  prevention  of  intemperance  in  the  several  States,  and  the  effect  produced 
by  such  legislation  upon  the  consumption  of  distilled  or  spirituous  liquors  and  fermented 
ormalt  liquors ; also  to  ascertain  whether  the  evils  of  drunkenness  have  been  increased 
or  decreased  and  whether  public  morals  have  been  improved  thereby.  It  shall  also  be 
the  duty  of  said  commissioners  to  gather  information  and  take  ^ testimony  as  to  whether 
the  evil  of  drunkenness  exists  to  the  same  extent,  or  more  so  in  other  civilized  countries, 
and  whether  those  foreign  nations  that  are  considered  the  most  temperate  in  the  use  ol 
stimulants  are  do  through  prohibitory  laws ; and  also  to  what  degree  prohibitory  legisla- 
tion has  affected  the  consumption  and  manufacture  of  malt  and  spirituous  liquors  in  thii 
country. 

“ Sec.  2.  That  the  said  commissioners  shall  serve  without  salary,  shall  be  authorized  to 
employ  a secretary  at  a reasonable  compensation,  not  to  exceed  $2,000  per  annum,  which, 
with  the  necessary  expenses  incidental  to  said  investigation,  in  all  not  exceeding  $10000, 
of  both  the  secretary  and  commissioners,  shall  be  paid  out  of  any  money  in  the  Treasury, 
not  otherwise  appropriated,  upon  vouchers  to  be  approved  by  the  Fifth  Auditor  of  the 
Treasury  It  shall  be  the  further  duty  of  said  commissioners  to  report  the  result  of  their 
ioTOstigation  and  the  expenses  attending  the  same,  to  the  President,  to  be  by  him  transmitted 

Congress." 


4, 


4 


. ■ ' .-i 


.Jte7 


ii*; 

2v 


No.  187. 

PROHIBITION  IN  MAINE. 


BY  HON.  NELSON  DINGLEY,  JR. 


The  recent  amendments  of  the  Maine  law  prohibiting  dram- 
shops, so  as  to  increase  the  efficiency  of  its  enforcement,  are 
calling  forth  a shower  of  assaults  on  prohibition.  So  interested 
in  our  prohibition  policy  has  become  the  whole  country,  that 
not  only  many  of  the  Boston  papers,  but  even  the  New  York 
Times  Tribune,  have  joined  in  the  cry  that  “prohibition  is 
a failure  in  Maine.”  In  response  to  inquiries  from  all  parts  of 
the  country,  as  to  the  truth  of  these  allegations,  we  put  on  rec- 
ord ' he  folaowing  significant  facts  : 

I The  fact  that  our  prohibitory  system  has  stood  in  our 
statutes  since  1851 — with  the  exception  of  two  years  (1856  and 
1857)  when  license  was  tried  in  its  place — and  has  steadily  in- 
creased in  popularity  until  no  party  dares  to  go  before  the  people 
on  the  issue  of  its  repeal,  is  conclusive  evidence  that  the  great 
body  of  the  people  of  Maine,  who  have  had  the  best  opportunity 
to  judge  of  its  practical  workings,  believe  that  it  is  the  most  effi- 
cient legal  policy  ever  devised  as  a supplement  of  moral  agencies 
in  dealing  with  the  evils  arising  from  the  use  and  sale  of  intox- 
icating liquors.  No  one  expects  that  it  can  take  the  place  of 
moral  agencies,  but  that  it  is  simply  an  adjunct  of  them — just  as 
laws  prohibiting  houses  of  ill-fame  and  gambling  resorts,  are 
adjuncts  to  moral  means  in  promoting  virtue.  No  one  claims 
that  it  can  entirely  extirpate  the  dram-shop  evil,  any  more  than 
the  laws  prohibiting  and  punishing  theft  or  murder  can  uproot 
these  crimes.  All  these  laws  aid  in  removing  temptation 
and  in  creating  a healthier  public  sentiment,  and  make  it  easier 
to  do  right  and  harder  to  do  wrong. 

2.  Our  prohibitory  laws  have  unquestionably  aided  materially  t 
fn  creating  a better  public  sentiment  in  the  matter  of  the  use 
of  intoxicating  liquors  than  exists  in  any  State  which  has  a 
license  law.  Whatever  is  prohibited  by  law,  either  directly  or 
indirectly,  is  thereby  deprived  of  a certain  appearance  of 
respectability  which  attaches  to  everything  that  is  under  legal 
protection.  Mr.  Raper,  the  distinguished  Englishman,  who 
spent  some  time  in  Maine  and  other  parts  of  this  country  a few 
years  ago,  stated  in  a public  speech  that  he  did  not  believe 
there  was  in  the  whole  civilized  world  a State  of  like  population 


2 


PROHIBmON  IN  MAINE. 


SO  free  as  ours  from  the  evils  of  intemperance,  or  one  possessed 
of  so  healthy  a public  sentiment  in  the  matter  of  the  use  of 
liquors  as  a beverage. 

f 3.  Prohibition  has  stopped  effectually  the  manufacture  of  dis- 
*>illed  and  fermented  liquors  in  Maine.  In  1830,  when  our  popu- 
lation was  less  than  two-thirds  of  what  it  is  to-day,  there  were 
thirteen  distilleries  in  this  State,  which  manufactured  over  two 
gallons  of  rum  to  each  inhabitant,  nearly  all  of  which  was  con- 
sumed in  the  State.  To-day  there  is  not  a single  distillery  or 
brewery  in  Maine. 

t-  4.  Prohibition  has  well-nigh  stopped  the  traffic  in  intoxicating 
liquors  in  the  rural  districts  of  Maine.  Forty-five  years  ago 
all  the  country  taverns  had  open  bars,  and  all  the  country  stores 
sold  intoxicating  liquors  as  freely  as  molasses  or  calico.  For 
example,  the  town  of  Durham,  with  less  than  1,500  inhabitants, 
had  in  1832  seven  licensed  grog-shops.  To-day  there  is  not  a 
drop  of  liquor  sold  in  town.  Readfield  had  in  1832  seven  open 
bars,  at  which  were  sold  2,300  gallons  of  spirits  annually.  Now 
none  is  sold  to  be  used  as  a beverage.  Minot  (then  including 
Auburn),  with  a population  of  2,903  in  1833,  had  thirteen  grog- 
shops. Now  these  towns,  with  a population  of  10,000,  have  not 
a single  place  where  liquor  is  known  to  be  sold  as  a beverage. 

a 5.  Fifty  years  ago,  even  in  our  rural  districts,  nearly  every 
male  drank  liquor.  Liquors  were  kept  in  most  of  the  houses 
to  treat  callers.  Nobody  thought  of  having  company,  or  a 
raising,  without  a supply  of  ardent  spirits.  At  musters  and 
other  public  gatherings,  drunkenness  and  drunken  affrays  were 
common.  Now,  three-fourths  of  the  males  in  the  rural  dis- 
tricts are  total  abstinents,  and  the  practice  of  keeping  liquors 
in  houses  to  treat  callers  has  practically  ceased.  It  would  be 
considered  an  unpardonable  offense  to  furnish  spirits  at  a pub- 
lic meeting.  At  large  public  gatherings,  cases  of  intoxication 
are  surprisingly  few,  and  drunken  altercations  rare.  This  im- 
provement is  strikingly  shown  by  statistics.  In  1833,  Secretary 
Pond,  of  the  Maine  Temperance  Association,  reported  that  in 
the  town  of  Alfred  there  were  fifty-five  men  and  three  women 
accustomed  to  get  beastly  drunk ; in  Kennebunk,  ninety-five 
notorious  drunkards;  in  Topsham  (population  1,564),  forty 
drunkards;  in  New  Gloucester,  forty;  Fannington,  eighty; 
Wayne,  thirty.  Recent  reports  from  th*se  towns  show  that  the 
present  number  of  notorious  drunkai  ds  in  these  and  other 
towns  is  not  one-eighth,  and  many  towns  say  notone-tenth,  of 
what  it  was  forty  years  ago.  The  reports  also  show  a marked 
improvement  in  the  condition  of  the  people. 


PROHIBITION  IN  MAINE. 


s 


» 6.  In  the  cities  and  larger  villages,  repre.jenting  less  than 
one-fourth  of  the  population  of  Maine,  the  improvement  is  less 
marked  than  in  the  rural  districts,  although  undeniably  real, 
even  there.  There  are  three  reasons  for  this  less  marked  im- 
provement : the  greater  facilities  that  vice  has  to  hide  itself  in 
crowded  populations  ; the  concentration  there  of  a large  foreign 
population  which  has  come  into  this  State  within  thirty  years ; 
and  the  resort  to  the  city  of  the  drinking  men,  still  left  in  the 
rural  regions,  for  supplies  of  liquor.  If  the  cities  had  simply 
held  their  own  under  these  circumstances  it  would  be  a great 
gain.  But  they  have  done  more  than  this.  As  a rule,  there  are 
no  open  dram-shops  even  here.  Occasionally,  through  the 
failure  to  elect  both  city  officials  and  county  sheriffs  friendly  to 
prohibition,  the  law  is  neglected  and  open  dram-shops  appear. 
That  has  been  the  case  during  the  past  year  in  two  or  three 
cities  whose  condition  is  being  quoted  to  the  exclusion  of  the 
large  part  of  the  State  where  the  law  is  well  enforced.  But 
generally  speaking,  even  in  the  cities  intoxicating  liquors  are 
sold  only  surreptitiously,  and  are  to  be  found  only  by  those  who 
know  the  signs  and  pass-words  of  the  liquor  fraternity — and 
then,  mainly  in  places  kept  by  foreigners.  There  are  few  open 
dram-shops  to  tempt.  In  the  cities  of  Lewiston  and  Auburn, 
with  a population  of  nearly  30,000,  there  is  not  a single  open 
dram-shop,  and  no  hotel  has  even  a secret  bar.  In  the  larger 
cities  there  are  many  cases  of  drunkenness,  but  a majority  of 
them  are  of  foreigners,  who  resort  to  the  most  desperate  expe- 
dients to  obtain  a supply  of  liquor.  As  confirmed  inebriates  in 
the  rural  districts  are ’obliged  to  resort  to  the  cities  to  obtain 
their  potations,  it  frequently  happens  that  the  police  reports  of 
a city  like  Portland  show  nearly  all  the  cases  of  drunkenness 
for  a populous  county. 

7.  The  charge  is  frequently  made  that,  so  far  as  the  cities  are 
concerned,  the  traffic  has  been  simply  driven  out  of  sight. 
Even  if  nothing  more  had  been  gained,  it  is  something  to  banish 
the  temptations  of  the  dram-shop  where  only  those  seeking  them 
will  find  them.  It  is  also  occasionally  alleged  that  club-rooms, 
naore  dangerous  than  dram-shops,  have  taken  the  place  of  the 
latter.  After  careful  inquiry,  we  can  not  learn  that  club-rooms 
exist  outside  of  a few  cities  in  Maine,  and  even  there,  not  so 
extensively  as  in  many  cities  of  similar  size  in  license  States. 
The  new  amendments  to  the  prohibitory  law  will  reach  this 
attempt  to  evade  its  provisions,  and  soon  serve  to  make  drinking 
clubs  scarce.  Setting  aside  the  large  foreign  population  in  our 
cities,  it  is  conceded  that  the  improvement  in  ’he  drinking  habits 


PKoniBiTioN  nsr  maiste. 


of  the  remainder  is  marked.  This  is  especially  so  nn’th  the  bone 
and  muscle  of  the  native  population. 

8.  It  is  difficult  to  obtain  reliable  statistics  of  the  extent  to 
which  the  surreptitious  sale  of  liquors  is  still  carried  on  in 
Maine.  Some  of  the  enemies  of  prohibition  claim  that  a million 
and  a quarter  dollars’  worth  are  sold  here  annually.  But  allow- 
ing even  this,  and  we  have  ^2  per  inhabitant  now,  against  .$25 
per  inhabitant  forty  years  ago,  and  $16  per  inhabitant  as  the 
average  for  the  Union  to-day.  This  shows  that  not  more  than 
one-tenth  as  much  liquor,  proportionally,  is  consumed  in  Maine 
as  there  was  forty  years  ago,  and  not  more  than  one-eighth  as 
much  as  in  the  country  at  large  to-day. 

On  this  point  the  revenue  collected  by  the  United  States 
from  the  manufacture  and  sale  of  intoxicating  liquors  in  Maine, 
in  comparison  with  that  collected  in  license  States,  sheds  some 
light.  Prohibitory  Maine  has  about  the  same  population  as 
license  New  Jersey;  yet  the  liquor  tax  in  the  former  State  is 
only  three  cents  per  inhabitant,  while  in  the  latter  State  it  is 
$2.40,  and  in  the  country  at  large  ;^i-83.  In  reply  to  the  asser- 
tion that  tobacco  and  opium-eating  are  taking  the  place  of  liq- 
uor-drinking in  Maine,  we  may  mention  that  the  tobacco  lax 
paid  by  Maine  is  only  seventeen  cents  per  inhabitant,  while  the 
average  for  the  country  is  i$i  per  inhabitant;  and  that  opium- 
eating is  far  less  prevalent  here  than  in  other  Eastern  States. 

9.  While  it  is  undeniable  that  great  temperance  progress  has 
been  made  in  Maine  with  the  help  of  our  prohibitory  policy, 
yet  no  one  claims  that  either  the  sale  or  use  of  intoxicating 
liquors  has  been  banished  from  our  borders.  They  have  been 
greatly  limited,  and  the  great  body  of  the  people  recognize  our 
prohibitory  laws  as  essential  aids  in  this  good  work.  But  much 
remains  to  be  done.  Experience  is  showing  weak  spots  in  our 
laws,  and  from  time  to  time  these  are  being  strengthened.  The 
recent  amendments  will  increase  the  efficiency  of  the  laws,  and 
secure  better  results.  In  spite  of  jeers,  in  spite  of  opposition, 
in  spite  of  declarations  that  the  temperance  cause  is  retrograding 
instead  of  advancing,  the  good  work  will  go  on  in  Maine,  and 
year  by  year  will  show  new  triumphs  in  the  great  battle  against 
King  Alcohol. 


Published  by  the  National  Temperance  Society  and  Publication  House.  $1 
Reads  Street,  New  Yoric,  Price  per  Thousand. 


I 


Date  Due 

T.  ■ 

i?  j 

IM  7 'B?; 

! 

? 

Form  335.  45il  8-37. 

